How to sell a coup: elections as coup legitimation

Unlike other political leaders, leaders coming to power through military coups face a dual legitimation challenge: they must justify not only why they should rule but also how they came to power. Little attention has been paid to how coup leaders solve this legitimacy deficit and even less to the audiences of this legitimation. We ask: why do some coup leaders legitimate their coups by holding elections while others do not? Counterintuitively, we argue that coup leaders who oust democratically elected leaders are less likely to hold elections, except when tied to US military aid. We test these hypotheses through a data set of military coup regimes from 1946 to 2014 and trace out mechanisms through case studies of the Nigerian coup of 1983 and the Egyptian coup of 2013. This argument provides a new explanation for the emergence of authoritarian elections and a new perspective on the international dimensions of dictatorship

The Politics of Intergovernmental Relations: Assessing the Many Phases and Challenges of Nigeria’s Judicial System

The judiciary is an important organ of government as it functions as a counterbalancing institution in states. Notwithstanding the nature of the political system in place, either democratic or nondemocratic, the judiciary plays the essential role of interpreting the extant laws and adjudicating between competing interests whether domiciled in individuals, groups, institutions of government or the various arms of government. The stabilising role of the judiciary in modern governance is exemplified by its ingrained function of checking the excesses of individuals, groups and government institutions through the application of state laws. Since Nigeria’s independence, its judiciary has been discharging its constitutional responsibilities. The journey of the Nigerian judiciary has been quite explosive, considering that it traversed both the jackboot of military authoritarianism and democratic governance in diverse forms, with each presenting its own peculiar bouquet of challenges. This chapter examines the various phases and attendant challenges that the Nigerian judiciary has passed through. It chronicles its many challenges and triumphs as well as low points. In sum, the Nigerian judiciary has acquitted itself admirably in dealing with such challenges as judicial independence, judicial accountability and crisis of condence occasioned by judicial recklessness and corruption. However, Nigeria’s judicial system still has room for further improvement in order to continue to command the respect of the citizens and thus, deserve such epithets as “the last hope of the common man”, “the bulwark of the people’s liberty”, “the defender of the rights of the people” and “the bastion of constitutional democracy,” among others, which demonstrate public acceptance and confidence

Genocidal Consolidation: Final Solutions to Elite Rivalry

Political Culture and National Identit