Abstract

Around the world “free” democracies actively seek to undermine the political influence of ethnic and regional minorities by impeding the formation of parties aimed at furthering their interests. Here, we assess the impact of two kinds of legal provisions against ethnoregional parties—outright bans and ballot-access requirements that indirectly impede their ability to win votes and legislative seats. Despite being less direct, we theorize ballot-access requirements should be much more effective at undermining ethnoregional parties as they provide seemingly objective rules that are easy to enforce. In contrast, outright bans require difficult subjective decisions on parties with a non-ethnoregional façade. Combining in-depth case analysis with multivariate models based on a comprehensive dataset of election results spanning 73 countries between 1990 and 2012, we find that party bans do little to curb ethnoregional party influence. By contrast, registration and ballot-access requirements are much more effective.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.