Editor's Note

The year 2024 is referred to as a “super election year,” with over 70 countries worldwide having held or scheduled to hold elections. In light of the pivotal role that free and fair elections play in fostering citizen engagement and government accountability, the Asia Democracy Research Network (ADRN) has published a special report featuring case studies from seven Asian countries that held national elections in 2024. Researchers from each country analyze key electoral issues, significant outcomes, and assess the overall quality of the elections, as well as their impact on the countries’ democratic processes.

  •  

    Preface

     

    Sook Jong Lee

    Representative of ADRN

     


     

    The year 2024 is a ‘super year’ for elections, with 3.7 billion voters in 72 countries having already cast or scheduled to cast their ballots. The Asia Democracy Research Network (ADRN) invited 7 experts from member institutions to provide their views on each of 7 Asian countries that held elections by the first half of this year. I requested that they evaluate the electoral integrity, salient issues and notable features, as well as the impact of the elections on democracy. One individual’s perspective on electoral processes and outcomes may lack sufficient objectivity to be considered fully scientific. Nevertheless, these scholars are experts in this field and their analyses are aligned with existing election studies of the given country. The concise format of these essays offers a comprehensive overview of the current status of elections in Asian countries.

     

    In light of the challenges facing electoral democracies, including corruption, populism, and poor management, there has been a growing skepticism about the ability of elections to effect meaningful change in political outcomes. It is true that elections can be utilized to legitimize an autocracy, or newly elected leaders may be more problematic than their predecessors. Nevertheless, it is only through winning an electoral competition that any individual or entity in a position of authority can claim legitimacy. Therefore, politicians, scholars, and civil society leaders persist in their efforts to ensure that elections work for a genuine democracy.

     

    In the seven Asian countries under consideration, two conducted elections under a new electoral systеm, while the remaining five held elections in accordance with the existing rules. In Mongolia, the legislative elections introduced proportional ballots for the first time. The combination of simple majority constituency votes with newly arranged proportional votes is assessed to increase political inclusivity and inter-party collaboration. The opportunity for people to select their senators away from the military hands in Thailand, even if candidacies were limited to categorized occupational groups, is a significant progress to the country’s democratic development. The most notable election results would be the legislative election in India. In contradiction with the prevailing popular view, the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was unable to secure a majority of seats. The unexpected election results have fostered optimism for checking the Modi government’s autocratization and facilitating democratic reforms. Additionally, in Pakistan, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) supported independents secured the largest number of seats, despite harassment from intervening security establishment against the party. The electoral processes in India and Pakistan demonstrate that the outcome of elections matter even their process is flawed.

     

    The Indonesian elections were marred by controversy surrounding the qualification of Vice-President Gibran Rakabuming Raka, the son of incumbent President Joko Widodo. Despite the comfortable victory of the Prabowo-Gibran tickets in the presidential and vice-presidential elections, the return of deep-rooted dynastic politics is regarded as a contributing factor to the democratic backlash. As the ruling coalition grows in size, it is anticipated that parliamentary checks on executive power will become more challenging to implement. The elections in South Korea and Taiwan seem to have been less dramatic, given that they had been conducted under the same severe political polarization for some time. The legislative elections in South Korea constituted a mid-term referendum on the incumbent President Yoon Suk Yeol. As a result of the ruling party’s significant defeat, which saw it retain only approximately one-third of the seats, the party and the Yoon government lost their ability to control the policy agenda. This has led to an intensification of the already contentious political environment. In the case of Taiwan, the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) won the presidential elections but could not gain the majority in the legislature. Consequently, the newly elected President Lai Ching-te is confronted with a divided government and a legislature that is unable to function effectively, which has resulted in the postponement of crucial legislation that affects the people’s lives.

     

    In terms of electoral cleanness, as evidenced by the V-Dem index (see Appendix 2), both South Korea and Taiwan are highly clean with fair and transparent management of election process by a capable election commission, and no vote buying due to higher penalties. Indonesia, Mongolia, and India are situated in the middle range. On the other hand, the elections in Thailand and Pakistan have been perceived as highly corrupted, characterized by the purchase of votes, electoral fraud, the infiltration of electoral processes by those in power, and even the rejection of electoral outcomes.

     

    As for election issues, all authors point out that economic policy issues were not a prominent feature, whereas political issues were dominant. The political issues that arise are primarily focused on personal attacks and accusations rather than on more substantive political policies, such as electoral reform, anti-corruption measures, or other significant matters. Current elections have been captured by exaggerated images and extreme (also fabricated) narratives. This dangerous symptom diverts voters’ attention from crucial choice issues that have the potential to influence their lives. The impact of disinformation varies considerably across countries. India has a pervasive presence of disinformation during election periods. On the other hand, disinformation in South Korea and Taiwan did not play a significant role in influencing voters’ decisions, although disinformation from China was a notable factor in Taiwan.

     

    The summary tables of the seven essays (see Appendix 1) are provided in this report for readers’ convenience. ADRN will continue to publish timely regional and comparative studies that are crucial for understanding the current status of Asian democracies.

     

     

    Sincerely,

     

    Sook Jong Lee

    Representative of ADRN

Major Project

Center for Democracy Cooperation

Asia

Democracy

Detailed Business

Democracy Cooperation

Asia Democracy Research Network

Related Publications