How to consolidate quickly: The cases of Algeria and Tunisia

Abstract

Several governments in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) have used pandemic measures to silence opposition voices and curb human rights. This article delvers deeper into this dynamic in Algeria and Tunisia by systematically analyzing regime use of preexisting authoritarian legal frameworks to target perceived regime opponents. Notably, unlike other regimes in the MENA, COVID-19 pandemic-specific laws (such as curfew violations) were not heavily relied on to arrest and prosecute prominent opponents. Instead, foundational laws that restrict free speech and assembly with intentionally vague language, which often date back decades, were reused. Several of these laws were enhanced during the pandemic to grant the executive more leeway in their use and expanded fines and prison sentences. Interestingly, despite the very public use of these laws, regimes in both countries have maintained relatively high public approval ratings. This is remarkable, given that past autocrats were overthrown for similar abuses. This demonstrates that pandemics grant aspiring authoritarian regimes greater leeway in the use of general legal mechanisms to restrict free speech and assembly. These kinds of crises can help maintain approval ratings despite extensive oppressive action by the state. This was especially true for Tunisia, where it appears that the pandemic created a rally-’round-the-flag effect that allowed the executive to consolidate his power in a dramatic democratic backslide.