Presidential elections: a chance for new political dynamism in Azerbaijan? (original) (raw)
Related papers
"This article offers a contextual analysis of the Azerbaijani October 2013 presidential elections making a number of arguments: (1) during good times (when economic and political shocks are absent), elections are unlikely to induce incumbent defeat or democratic breakthrough; this explains why the October elections were business as usual; (2) the October elections had different roles and meanings for different actors: winning with a fabricated landslide was used by the leader to signal his own and his regime’s strength and to intimidate opponents; for the opposition, it was an arena to mobilize support and to expose government corruption; for citizens, elections were less relevant as something affecting their everyday lives; (3) many citizens hold an instrumental and clientelistic view of government as a system to deliver particularistic services which matches well with the clientelism at higher political levels and might complicate collective action and impede the prospects of the country’s democratization in the future."
Azerbaijan's October 2008 Presidential Election: Outcome and Implications
2008
This report discusses the win by incumbent Ilkham Aliyev in Azerbaijan's October 15, 2008, presidential election. It describes the campaign and results, and examines implications for Azerbaijani and U.S. interests. This report will not be updated. Related reports include CRS Report RL33453, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia, updated regularly.
THE 15 OCTOBER 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: THE CONSOLIDATION OF ILHAM ALIYEV'S POWER IN AZERBAIJAN
The presidential election held on October 15, 2008 marked a crucial phase in the consolidation of the semi-authoritarian regime in Azerbaijan. Azeri politics has long suffered from the authoritarian tendencies of the government. Due in part to the boycott of the major opposition parties, the incumbent president, Ilham Aliyev, emerged from the election even stronger. The election was uncompetitive and the result was expectable. However, high voter turnout indicates the weakness of opposition to mobilize the voters not to participate in the elections. The election outcome can be clearly seen as an approval of the policies of Ilham Aliyev, but it also represents the opposition's inability to be a significant force in the Azeri political landscape. Yet, the president will face thorny problems in his second term still waiting to be resolved.
Presidential elections in Azerbaijan
2013
Azerbaijan's sixth presidential election since independence, held on 9 October 2013, was again neither free nor fair. It granted President Ilham Aliyev his third term after term limits had been eliminated by a referendum in 2009. However, the election itself passed essentially unnoticed because the media completely ignored the opposition and the incumbent refused to campaign. This situation left the citizenry uninformed about political developments in the country and particularly about the activities of the opposition. In addition, the permanent repression and violation of human rights has created a climate in which the citizenry is not (and has no willingness to be) involved in politics. The status quo is here to stay.
Azerbaijan – In the aftermath of the Parliamentary Election
On 1 November a parliamentary election was held in Azerbaijan. A total of 767 candidates competed for 125 seats. As largely predicted, the ruling New Azerbaijan (Yeni Azerbaijan) party won the vast majority of seats in the Milli Majilis.
This report seeks to highlight the role of international observer missions of the 9 November 2005 parliamentary election in Azerbaijan. It also presents in-depth assessments of the pre- and post-election situation in the country. The six articles that are presented in the volume have been produced by leading scholars or development practitioners in Azerbaijan.The report forms part of the ‘Network for Election Observation and Exchange’. This is project that is supported by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Athenaeum, 2022
In recent years, Armenia and Georgia have carried out constitutional reforms bringing about a radical change in their respective political systems with a shift to a parliamentary model of government. To permanently democratize both countries, the role of presidents in political systems was weakened and their election was introduced indirectly. The paper discusses the main elements of presidential electoral law in both countries with their main similarities and differences. In Armenia, the president is elected by the parliament, while in Georgia by a special electoral body. The following paper argues that the constitutional reforms in both countries are intended to prevent crises of power caused by an excessive concentration of power in the hands of presidents, although the reforms do not provide a guarantee of genuine democratisation and stability of governments. The possible outcomes of the reforms can be different: in Armenia – the increase of the dependence of the president on the main political parties, in Georgia – strengthening his independence.