Reselection and Deselection in the Political Party, forthcoming in The Politics of Recall Elections (Welp Y. and Whitehead L. eds) (Basingstoke: Palgrave) (original) (raw)
Related papers
The paper explores the ethics of recalling representatives in the context of a democratic conception of partisanship and related defence of political parties. It examines the promise of recall mechanism in light of the difficulties that liberal conceptions of representation have in realising the value of self-government. It defends the role of recall mechanisms within political parties (both mandatory reselection and deselection of representatives), responds to objections and concludes that recall mechanisms play an important role in bridging the gap between direct democracy and representative institutions.
Can the Recall Improve Electoral Representation?
Frontiers in Political Science, 2020
Empirical studies reveal many citizens' unwillingness to get rid of representative democracy. A great number of them, however, distrust their representatives and would want representation to be improved, for example by giving citizens more control over their representatives. One possible mechanism of control is the recall-the possibility to remove elected representatives from office through a vote before the end of their term. Although this democratic tool is on the rise worldwide and was supported in the past by influential figures such as Rousseau and Marx, its study has been neglected by contemporary political theorists. The aim of this contribution is to identify the main arguments for and against the use of recall mechanisms, and to assess both their normative and empirical validity. In particular, it asks whether they have the capacity to improve the quality of representation or at least the perception of representative institutions' legitimacy, and answers with a moderate "yes"-especially for the latter aspect (perceived legitimacy).
The levelling up of a political institution. Perspectives on the recall referendum
As a mechanism of direct democracy the recall referendum is oriented to remove elected officials from office by popular vote before the end of their term. In the past, only a few countries had regulations to activate it. However, recently legal provisions allowing for the recall procedure have been increasingly introduced in different areas of the world, while also practices are growing. In this scenario this chapter pursuits two goals: 1) to draw the map of direct recall referendums around the world, identifying countries and institutional targets (national and or local, executive and or legislative) in which it is currently spreading, and 2) by looking at illustrative cases we test the extent to which recall fulfils different functions depending on a) the main agent initiating the process e.g. political actor or civil society, and b) its function e.g. primary (remove elected authority) or secondary (resolve policy or institutional conflict): direct accountability, indirect accountability, institutional struggle, and party competition.
Recall referendum around the world: origins, institutional designs and current debates
The Routledge Handbook to Referendums and Direct Democracy, 2018
Similar than with other mechanisms of direct democracy and probably more, recall strongly divides supporters and detractors. For Bowler (2004), the main argument in favour of recall is derived from a view of democracy that places emphasis on elected representatives as delegates and not trustees. Wether in favour or against, most of these arguments are still unpproved by empirical evidence (e.g. the availability of recall and the level of public information citizen’s have or the effects of recall discouraging individuals from running for public positions); while others display different results according to different case studies (Qvortrup 2011, Welp y Serdült 2014, Vásquez Oruna 2014, Limón 2016 among others). This chapter presents the definition, regulation, spread of activation and current research on the topic.