Papers

• Political Change and Consolidation in Southeast Asia: An Institutionalist explanation Abdillah Noh Universiti Brunei Darussalam

  Why is consolidating political change difficult? Equally important, why are change agents so persuasive in promising reform ideas when bidding for a political transition, yet so dismal in delivering them once they assume power? This paper addresses these questions by examining political change and consolidation issues in five Southeast Asian countries. By employing the institutionalist argument, it aims to explain the nature of political transitions in the Philippines, Myanmar, Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia, countries that have all experienced episodes of political transition. The project will probe the nature and relevance of idiosyncratic institutional qualities in determining a state’s ability to make the political transition and consolidate change. Ultimately, the paper aims to provide a firmer understanding of institutions and change.

• Ketuanan Melayu as Ethnic Institutional Order: Institutional Resilience and Political Gridlock in Malaysia, 2018-2020 Morris Chan London School of Economics and olitical Science

  This paper considers the puzzle of the lack of political reforms in post-2018 Malaysia through the lens of “racial institutional order,” a concept originated from the subfield of American Politics. Researchers on Malaysia mostly agree on the centrality of ethnicity in Malaysian politics and society. Conceptualizing Malaysian politics in the traditional ethnic “consociational” lens, however, obscures the fact that Malay supremacy only evolved from a stated aim to an institutional order over time. Furthermore, previous literature mostly asserted that Malaysian political change would come through either regime elite split or civil society activism; the observed lack of change now calls into question the validity of these two mechanisms. Adapting a concept for the Malaysian context, this paper argues that Malay supremacy developed into a full-fledged institutional order between 1969 and 2018. It consolidated into a political economic framework such that the opposition also embedded itself within this order, either by billing itself as a regime alternative within this framework, or by explicitly rejecting this order to represent those excluded under it. Any proposed reform, however ostensibly non-ethnic, has ethnic implications and must confront significant institutional resistance. Examining the political events and trajectories of legislative projects during the second Mahathir government (May 2018 – February 2020), this paper shows that the first non-UMNO government incorporated for the first time an alternative ethnic institutional order on the government benches. Conflict between the two rival orders rendered the delivery of reform promises difficult if not impossible.

• The normal abnormalities: Elections as an institution opposes the development of democracy in Thailand. Nitchapat Kitcharern Sukkhothaithammathirath Open University

  This paper aims to study the significant phenomena, the general election in Thailand between 2019-2023. In the understanding of the general public, the general election is a composite image of a democratic regime. In other words, elections are the most important method that leads to a democratic regime. However, some elections in Thailand are different. These events raise impotent questions about how elections, as a democratic practice institution, can be counterproductive to their purpose and function of strengthening democracy.
  This paper presents aspects of elections which are counterproductive to democratic development, with the main question being: “Which form of election has a positive effect on the development of democracy, as it seems that any form of election has the opposite effect? Why is that so?” There are three main conceptual frameworks used in the analysis, namely (i) conceptual framework on the basic principles of democratic elections, (ii) conceptual framework on development and consolidation of democracy, and (iii) conceptual framework on the characteristics of democratic development and the concept of authoritarianism and elections. This paper will bring the above conceptual frameworks to analyze the latest two Thai general elections in March 2019 and May 2023.
  The findings indicated that an election that lacks two democratic precursors: elections that lack freedom and elections that lack fairness. In elections without freedom, people in society are unable to fully express their opinions, causing a state of tension. On the surface, society may appear to be calm, but the emotions of the masses hidden beneath the surface may lead to more conflict or polarization instead of the development of democracy. Moreover, Elections that create unfair rules give one party an advantage or may lead to a decrease in public trust in the election, instead of encouraging people to feel the need for democracy. The worst thing that can happen when elections do not follow democratic principles is the development of conflict and violence. The collective emotions of those in society who are disappointed with the electoral system can lead, people, who feel that formal politics cannot meet their true democratic needs, to the streets.

Abstract