Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T04:10:14.925Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Tale of Two Hybrid Regimes: A Study of Cabinets and Parliaments in Indonesia and Thailand

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2018

SIRIPAN NOGSUAN SAWASDEE
SIRIPAN NOGSUAN SAWASDEE*
Affiliation:
Lecturer at Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn Universitynogsuan@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article applies the concept of hybrid regimes to evaluate the state of political transition in Indonesia and Thailand. It aims to answer why the transition to democracy in Indonesia during 1999–2004 was successful, while the transition in Thailand during 1997–2006 culminated in a reversion to authoritarianism by examining the social profiles and formation of cabinet and parliament members as well as the design of constitutions. The study suggests that the lack of inclusiveness helps explain why democratization in Thailand was in failure. During the transition period, inclusiveness has not markedly increased because of the leadership strongman style, the flaws in the recruitment process, and the problem with the party system. This was unlike Indonesia, where cabinet, parliament, and multiparty system were able to include a variety groups and broad societal segments that played a significant role in deliberating political rules of the game. Indonesia's institutional rearrangements appear to sustain popular participation and engender momentum for fostering democracy, while Thailand's constitutional re-engineering contains many provisions to disempower the elected bodies. The perpetuation of the hybrid regime in Thailand is foreseeable as the hybridity satisfies the needs and concerns of the traditional elites and the urban middle class.

Type
Research Article
Information
Japanese Journal of Political Science , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , June 2018 , pp. 269 - 292
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ABC News (2014), ‘Indonesian Unions Look for Influence in Government’, 4 April, www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-01/an-indonesia-unions-influence/5360062 (accessed 5 June 2017).Google Scholar
Abdulbaki, Louay (2008), ‘Democratisation in Indonesia: From Transition to Consolidation’, Asian Journal of Political Science, 16 (2): 151–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhakti, Ikrar Nusa (2004), ‘The Transition to Democracy in Indonesia: Some Outstanding Problems’, in Rolfe, Jim (ed.), The Asia Pacific: A Region in Transition, Honolulu, HI: Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies, pp. 195–207.Google Scholar
Brownlee, Jason (2007), Authoritarianism in an Age of Democratization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brownlee, Jason (2009), ‘Portents of Pluralism: How Hybrid Regimes Affect Democratic Transitions’, American Journal of Political Science, 53 (3): 515–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buehler, Michael (2014), ‘Elite Competition and Changing State–Society Relations: Shari'a Policymaking in Indonesia’, in Ford, Michele and Pepinsky, Tom (eds.), Beyond Oligarchy: Wealth, Power, and Contemporary Indonesian Politics, Ithaca: Cornell Southeast Asia Program Publications, pp. 157–75.Google Scholar
Candland, Christopher and Nurjanah, Siti (2001), ‘Indonesia after Wahid: The New Authoritarianism’, Briefing Paper, Royal Institute of International Affairs 28 (December), www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/public/Research/Asia/bp_28.pdf (accessed 6 June 2017).Google Scholar
Case, William (2011), ‘Executive Accountability in Southeast Asia: The Role of Legislatures in New Democracies and Under Electoral Authoritarianism’, Policy Studies, 57, Honolulu: East–West Center.Google Scholar
Cassani, Andrea (2012), ‘Hybrid What? The Contemporary Debate on Hybrid Regimes and the Identity Question’, XXVI, Convegno SISP, 13–15 September, Roma, www.sisp.it/files/papers/2012/andrea-cassani-1445.pdf (accessed 1 October 2016).Google Scholar
Cassani, Andrea (2014), ‘Hybrid What? Partial Consensus and Persistent Divergences in the Analysis of Hybrid Regimes’, International Political Science Review, 35 (5): 542–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chartrakul, Sakdina (2010), The Thai Labour Movement: Strength Through Unity, Bangkok: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.Google Scholar
Collier, David and Levitsky, Steven (1997), ‘Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative’, World Politics, 49 (3): 430–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crouch, Harold (1978), The Army and Politics in Indonesia, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Dhiravegin, Likhit (1991), Demi Democracy: The Evolution of the Thai Political System, Singapore: Times Academic Press.Google Scholar
Diamond, Larry, Linz, Juan J., and Martin Lipset, Seymour (eds.) (1995), Politics in Developing Countries: Comparing Experience with Democracy, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dressel, Björn and Mietzner, Marcus (2012), ‘A Tale of Two Courts: The Judicialization of Electoral Politics in Asia’, Governance, 25 (3): 391–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedom in the World Report, https://freedomhouse.org/report-types/freedom-world (accessed 1 July 2017).Google Scholar
Fukuoka, Yuki (2013), ‘Indonesia's “Democratic Transition” Revisited: A Clientelist Model of Political Transition’, Democratization, 20 (6): 991–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gagné, Jean-François (2012), ‘Alliance Politics in Hybrid Regimes: Political Stability and Instability since World War II’, PhD Dissertation, Université de MontréalGoogle Scholar
Geddes, Barbara (1999), ‘Authoritarian Breakdown: Empirical Test of a Game Theoretic Argument’, Paper prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Atlanta, September, http://eppam.weebly.com/uploads/5/5/6/2/5562069/authoritarianbreakdown_geddes.pdf. (accessed 14 June 2017).Google Scholar
Gerlach, Ricarda (2013), ‘Mega’ Expectations: Indonesia's Democratic Transition and First Female President’, in Derichs, Claudia and Thompson, Mark R. (eds.), Dynasties and Female Political Leaders in Asia: Gender, Power and Pedigree, Zurich and Berlin: LIT Verlag Münster.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Leah and Mohseni, Payam (2011), ‘Beyond Authoritarianism: The Conceptualization of Hybrid Regimes’, Studies in Comparative International Development, 46 (3): 270–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadiz, Vedi R. (2010), Localising Power in Post Authoritarian Indonesia: A Southeast Asia Perspective, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hicken, Allen (2006), ‘Party Fabrication: Constitutional Reform and the Rise of Thai Rak Thai’, Journal of East Asian Studies, 6 (3): 381–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillman, Ben (2011), ‘Electoral Governance and Democratic Consolidation in Indonesia’, The Indonesian Quarterly, 39 (3): 301–23.Google Scholar
Huber, John D. (1996), ‘The Vote of Confidence in Parliamentary Democracies’, The American Political Science Review, 90 (2): 269–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Indrayana, Denny (2008), Indonesian Constitutional Reform 1999–2002: An Evaluation of Constitutional-Making in Transition, Jakarta: Kompas Book Publishing.Google Scholar
Union, Inter-Parliamentary (2004), ‘Indonesia Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (House of Representatives): Elections Held in 2004’, www.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/arc/2147_04.htm (accessed 2 June 2017).Google Scholar
Kroef, Justus, van der, M. (1957), ‘Guided Democracy in Indonesia’, Far Eastern Survey, 26 (8): 113–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhonta, Erik Martinez (2008), ‘The Paradox of Thailand's 1997 People's Constitution: Be Careful What You Wish For’, Asian Survey, 48 (3): 373–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitsky, Steven and Way, Lucan A. (2002), ‘Elections without Democracy: The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism’, Journal of Democracy, 13 (2): 51–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitsky, Steven and Way, Lucan A. (2010), Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leyland, Peter and Harding, Andrew (2008), ‘The Constitutional Courts of Thailand and Indonesia: Two Case Studies from South East Asia’, Journal of Comparative Law, 3 (2): 118–38.Google Scholar
Liddle, R. William and Mujani, Saiful (2007), ‘Leadership, Party, and Religion: Explaining Voting Behavior in Indonesia’, Comparative Political Studies, 40 (7): 832–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linz, Juan J. (1994), ‘Presidential or Parliamentary Democracy: Does It Make a Difference?’, in Linz, Juan J. and Valenzuela, Arturo (eds.), The Failure of Presidential Democracy, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackie, Jamie (1999), ‘Indonesia's New “National Unity” Cabinet’, Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 35 (3): 153–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maisrikrod, Surin (1997), ‘The Making of Thai Democracy: A Study of Political Alliances Among the State, the Capitalists, and the Middle Class’, in Laothamotas, Anek (ed.), Democratisation in Southeast and East Asia, Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
Morlino, Leonardo (2008), ‘Hybrid Regimes or Regimes in Transition?’, FRIDE Working Paper No. 70 (September).Google Scholar
Morlino, Leonardo (2009), ‘Are There Hybrid Regimes? Or Are They Just an Optical Illusion?’, European Political Science Review, 1 (2): 273–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mujani, Saiful and William Liddle, R. (2010), ‘Voters and the New Indonesian Democracy’, in Aspinall, Edward and Mietzner, Marcus (eds.), Problems of Democratisation in Indonesia: Elections, Institutions and Society, Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, chapter 4.Google Scholar
Munck, Geraldo (1996), ‘Disaggregating Political Regime: Conceptual Issues in the Study of Democratization’, Kellogg Institute Working Paper No. 228.Google Scholar
Ottaway, Marina (2003), Democracy Challenged: The Rise of Semi-Authoritarianism, Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar
Phongpaichit, Pasuk and Baker, Chris (2004), Thaksin: The Business of Politics in Thailand, Chiang Mai: Silkworm.Google Scholar
Ramsay, Ansil (1980), ‘Thailand 1979: A Government in Trouble’, Asian Survey, 20 (2): 112–22, A Survey of Asia in 1979: Part II.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robison, Richard and Hadiz, Vedi (2004), Reorganising Power in Indonesia: The Politics of Oligarchy in an Age of Markets, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rüland, Jürgen et al. (2004), ‘The Legislatures of Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia: Towards Greater Inclusiveness?’, in Nelson, Michael H. (ed.), Thai Politics: Local and Global Perspectives, KPI Yearbook, No. 2 (2002/2003), Nonthaburi: King Prajadhipok's Institute, Chapter 2, pp. 25–94.Google Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni (1978), The Theory of Democracy Revisited, Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.Google Scholar
Sawasdee, Siripan Nogsuan (2006), Thai Political Parties in the Age of Reform, Bangkok: Institute of Public Policy Studies.Google Scholar
Schedler, Andreas (2002), ‘The Menu of Manipulation’, Journal of Democracy, 13 (2): 36–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schedler, Andreas (2006), Electoral Authoritarianism: The Dynamics of Unfree Competition, Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Sherlock, Stephen (2005), Indonesia's Regional Representative Assembly: Democracy, Representation and the Regions, Report on the Dewan Perwakilan Daerah (DPD), Australia: Centre for Democratic Institutions.Google Scholar
Stepan, Alfred and Skach, Cindy (1994), ‘Presidentialism and Parliamentarism Compared’, in Linz, Juan J. and Valenzuela, Arturo (eds.), The Failure of Presidential Democracy, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, chapter 1.Google Scholar
Stern, Aaron M. (2006), Institutional Change in Legislatures: Thailand's House of Representatives, 1979–2002, Michigan: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Suryadinata, Leo (2002), Elections and Politics in Indonesia, Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, pp. 224–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Syailendra, Emirza Adi (2016), ‘Two Years Under Jokowi: King or Puppet?’, in RSIS Commentary (The S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies at Nanyang Technological University), No. 212, August, 19.Google Scholar
Tamada, Yoshifumi (2014), ‘When Election Results Count: A Reflection on De-democratization in Thailand’, Asian and African Area Studies, 14 (1): 96–110.Google Scholar
Thabchumpon, Naruemon (2016), ‘Contending Political Networks: A Study of the “Yellow Shirt” and “Red Shirts” in Thailand's Politics’, in Takeshi Onimaru and Khoo Boo Teik, (eds.), Political Networks in Asia, Southeast Asian Studies, 5 (1): 93–113.Google Scholar
The Election Commission of Thailand (2000), Data, Statistics and Senatorial Electoral Results, Bangkok: The Election Commission of Thailand.Google Scholar
The Jakarta Post (2016a), ‘Jokowi's New Cabinet: Who's the Boss Now?’, 28 July 2016, http://www.thejakartapost.com/longform/2016/07/28/whos-the-boss-now.html (accessed 30 July 2016).Google Scholar
The Jakarta Post (2016b), ‘Opposition Coalition No Longer Solid: Pks Politician’, 2 January 2016, www.thejakartapost.com/news/2016/01/02/opposition-coalition-no-longer-solid-pks-politician.html (accessed 10 September 2016).Google Scholar
Thompson, Eric C. (1999), ‘Indonesia in Transition: The 1999 Presidential Elections’, NBR Briefing Policy Report December 1999, The National Bureau of Asian Research, www.nbr.org/publications/briefing/pdf/brief9.pdf (accessed 2 June 2017).Google Scholar
Ufen, Andreas (2006), ‘Political Parties in Post-Suharto Indonesia: Between politik aliran and Philippinisation’, Working Paper No. 37, GIGA Research Programme: Legitimacy and Efficiency of Political System, p. 9, www.giga-hamburg.de/en/system/files/publications/wp37_ufen.pdf (accessed 5 June 2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ufen, Andreas (2008a), ‘Political Party and Party System Institutionalisation in Southeast Asia: Lessons for Democratic Consolidation in Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand’, Pacific Review, 21(3): 327–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ufen, Andreas (2008b), ‘The Evolution of Cleavages in the Indonesian Party System German Institute of Global and Area Studies’, Working Paper No. 74, 1 April, SSRN, https://ssrn.com/abstract=1123942 or http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1123942 (accessed 28 June 2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weatherbee, Donald E. (1986), ‘Indonesia in 1985: Chill and Thaw’, Asian Survey, 26 (2): 141–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webber, Douglas (2005), ‘A consolidated patrimonial democracy? Democratization in post-Suharto Indonesia’, Paper presented at the workshop, ‘Post-Cold War Democratization in the Muslim World: Domestic, Regional and Global Trends’, Joint Sessions of the European Consortium of Political Research, Granada, 14–19 April.Google Scholar
Yong, Ben and Hazell, Robert (2011), Putting Goats amongst the Wolves: Appointing Ministers from outside Parliament, London: The Constitution Unit.Google Scholar
Zakaria, Fareed (1997), ‘The Rise of Illiberal Democracy’, Foreign Affairs, 76 (6): 22–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar