• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.197-221
• /
• 2018

The Cambodian People's Party swept all 125 assembly seats with 76.78% of the vote in 2018 general elections. The Cambodian National Rescue Party, having been dissolved by court, was excluded from the election and attempted to nullify the legitimacy of the election by demanding its supporters to boycott the election. The Cambodian People's Party launched a campaign encouraging to vote in a desperate need to thwart the boycott movement. The election then became an unprecedented kind of competition the winner of which is decided not by the percentage of the vote but by turnout. The Cambodian People's Party was the winner with the high turnout of 82.89%, securing the means to defend the legitimacy of the election. The potential supporters of the Cambodian National Rescue Party spread out with about a million voters switching to support the Cambodian People's Party. Over a half million invalid votes that unequivocally voiced opposition to the Cambodian People's Party were not sufficient to deny the legitimacy of the election. Having experienced the fierce competition in the 2013 general elections that threatened to end its rule, the Cambodian People's Party decided to secure its power in the upcoming election and executed a tactic designed to remove the rival party through legal means. Competition being removed, the Cambodian political system decayed back to hegemonic electoral authoritarianism from competitive electoral authoritarianism to which it had mad gradual progress through the general elections in the past.

• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.45-87
• /
• 2014

This study traces the possibility of political change in the Malaysian electoral history, especially by focusing on the 13th general election held in May 2013. The results of the 13th general election was another turning point in the history of Malaysia's electoral politics. Following after the 12th general election held in 2008, opposition coalition(PR) achieves a remarkable electoral result by obtaining over 50% of the total votes. Opposition parties also successfully collapsed the ruling coalition(BN)'s two-third majority in parliamentary. It was de-facto defeat of the ruling coalition and victory of the opposition coalition. More precisely, the 2013 election results show that the reformasi movement, which was active in 1998-99 period, are still alive and its impact on Malaysian electoral politics get stronger. Malaysia has long been considered as a typical electoral authoritarian regime since its independence in 1957. It is because that there has been negative relations between electoral politics and political change through out its electoral history. As shown in the most recent two general elections held in 2008 and 2013, however, Malaysia's hegemonic political system can be possibly changed through electoral politics. This article examines the detailed results of the series of post-reformarsi general elections(1999, 2004, 2008, 2013) and its political implications towards the nexus of electoral politics and political change under the electoral authoritarian regime in Malaysia.

• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.77-114
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this article is to verify whether recent political change in Thailand and the Philippines is temporarily shown "democratic recession" or "returning to authoritarianism". For the purpose this research establishes three propositions based on previous academic researches of political change. The is to verify characteristics of liberal democracy based on democratic procedures and institutions as well as civilian control over the military. The is to analyze the characteristics of authoritarianism such as the control over individual freedom and rights, concentration of power, and populist ruling behavior contrary to constitutionalism. The last one, , is to check either the coincidence or discrepancy between democratic institutions and popular understanding of democracy during democratic transitions. The finding through testing those propositions is that recent political change in two countries is more likely "returing to authoritarianism" rather than provisional "democratic recession". Implications of the finding has two aspects. One is that the only change in democratic procedures and institutions including the competition among political parties and peaceful change of governments are not enough to ensure a successful transition to liberal democracy. The other is that a half-democracy lacking the change of popular understanding and belief toward democracy as well as democratic practices cannot survive long enough. These are confirmed through this study on the cases of Thailand and the Philippines.

• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.28 no.3
• /
• pp.213-261
• /
• 2018

On May 9, 2018, regime change took place in Malaysia. It was the first regime change that took place in 61 years after independence in 1957. The regime change was an unexpected result not only in Malaysian experts but also in political circles. Moreover, the outcome of the election was more shocking because the opposition party was divided in this general election. The regime change in Malaysia was enough to attract worldwide attention because it meant the collapse of the oldest regime in the modern political system that exists, except North Korea and China. How could this have happened? In particular, how could the regime change, which had not been accomplished despite opposition parties' cooperation for almost 20 years, could be achieved with the divided opposition forces? What political implications does the 2018 general election result have for political change and democratization in Malaysia? How will the Malaysian politics be developed in the aftermath of the regime change? It is worth noting that during the process of finding answers, a series of general elections since the start of reformasi in 1998 tended to be likened to a series of "tsunami" in the Malaysian electoral history. This phenomenon of tsunami means that, even though very few predicted the possibility of regime change among academia, civil society and political circles, the regime change was not sudden. In other words, the regime in 2018 was the result of the desire and expectation of political change through a series of elections of Malaysian voters last 20 years. In this context, this study, in analyzing the results of the election in 2018, shows that the activation of electoral politics triggered by the reform movement in 1998, along with the specific situational factors in 2018, could lead to collapse of the ruling government for the first time since independence.