Suchergebnisse

This paper has to do with a question that is important for the future of the Hemisphere: namely, what to do about the Organization of American States (OAS)? On February 23, 2010, heads of state from throughout Latin America and the Caribbean met in Cancun and formed a new organization: the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC). It has the same membership as the OAS, but without the United States and Canada, and it includes Cuba.The new organization is expected to have another summit meeting in December, and this paper is written for that meeting. Although some have maintained that CELAC is not meant to displace the OAS, it will inevitably -- if it succeeds -- do that to some degree. This paper shows that an organization independent of Washington's influence is both necessary and desirable, especially for the furtherance of democracy in the Hemisphere.Although this paper is by its nature rather technical, the basic issues are not complicated. It calls into question, in a very serious manner, the conduct of the OAS in its unprecedented action that reversed the electoral result of the first round in Haiti's most recent election. As has been noted previously, this decision was not based on statistical inference from the electoral data. This paper goes further, and shows that the OAS decision was inconsistent with the electoral data. If the OAS decision was made for political reasons -- as appears to be the case -- it raises serious questions about the OAS as an independent arbiter of electoral or other disputes that arise in the hemisphere. It also indicates that the hemisphere may need a new multilateral organization to safeguard the rights of people in Latin America and the Caribbean to freely choose their own governments, and to democracy and self-determination more generally.

The political polarization, populist discourses and development of risk society inside the global contexthave been causing damages on electoral integrity and legitimacy. Domestic election monitoring is anecessity in order to establish a fair, secure and transparent election process. In Turkey, there is onedomestic monitoring organization, Vote and Beyond and a few non-governmental organizations tryingto observe elections. Elections in Turkey have not been analyzed around the concept of electoralintegrity and citizens are not aware of domestic monitoring. The aim of this paper is to present theconcept of electoral integrity and underline the importance of domestic monitoring, especially inpolitically divided societies. Our two key questions for this article are: "how can domestic monitoringorganizations help to establish electoral integrity and legitimacy in Turkey?", "what are the ideas ofvolunteers at Vote and Beyond on electoral integrity in Turkey?" According to these questions, thisarticle aims to analyze the activities of Vote and Beyond aiming to develop electoral knowledge ofTurkish people and legitimacy of the elections in Turkey and the impact of volunteers working withinthis NGO. Our analysis will be based on in-depth interviews with the founders and a pilot study of asurvey realized with volunteers of Vote and Beyond. The first argument relies on the idea that socialand political polarization and the development of global risks by populist and post-truth politicshave negative impacts on electoral integrity. And the second argument is that election malpracticesencourage more and more citizens to participate in election observation in order to prevent fraudand corruption during the elections. Within this approach, the article aims to make a theoretical andempirical contribution to electoral studies in Turkey. ; Siyasi kutuplaşmalar, popülist söylemlerin yükselişi ve küresel ölçekte risk toplumunun gelişimi, seçimbütünlüğü ve meşruiyetini olumsuz etkilemektedir. Bu bağlamda, yerel seçim gözlemi adil, güvenli veşeffaf seçim süreçlerinin sağlanabilmesi için bir zorunluluk olmaktadır. Türkiye'de seçimleri gözlemleyençeşitli sivil toplum örgütleri ve aktörleri olmakla birlikte, yerel seçim gözlem kuruluşu şekilde çalışanbir sivil toplum kuruluşu, Oy ve Ötesi, bulunmaktadır. Türkiye'de seçim çalışmaları seçim bütünlüğükavramı üzerinde durmamakta ve vatandaşlar yerel seçim gözlemi konusunda bilgi sahibi değildirler.Bu makalenin amacı öncelikle seçim bütünlüğü kavramını tanımlamak ve yerel seçim gözleminin,özellikle de siyasi kutuplaşmanın görüldüğü toplumlarda, öneminin altını çizmektir. Bu bağlamda,iki araştırma sorusu bu makalenin temelini oluşturmaktadır: yerel seçim gözlem grupları Türkiye'deseçim bütünlüğü ve meşruiyetini nasıl sağlayabilir? Oy ve Ötesi gönüllülerinin Türkiye'deki seçimbütünlüğü üzerine düşünceleri nelerdir? Bu sorular çerçevesinde, makalede, Türkiye'de seçimlere dairbilginin gelişmesi ve seçim meşruiyetinin sağlanması için çalışan Oy ve Ötesi derneğinin çalışmalarıve gönüllülerinin seçim bütünlüğünün gelişimine katkısı incelenecektir. Çalışmanın verileri Oy veÖtesi Derneği'nin iki yöneticisi ile gerçekleştirilmiş derinlemesine görüşmenin ve gönüllüler arasındagerçekleştirilmiş pilot anket çalışmasının verilerine dayanmaktadır. Çalışmanın ilk argümanı şöyledir:küresel ölçekte gözlemlenen toplumsal ve siyasi kutuplaşma, popülizm ve gerçek sonrası söylemlerlegelişen risk toplumu, seçim bütünlüğünü olumsuz etkilemektedir. İkinci argüman ise, seçimlerdekiyanlış uygulamalar, vatandaşları seçimlere ve secim gözlemine katılmaya teşvik etmektedir. Bu yaklaşımçerçevesinde, makale, Türkiye'deki seçim çalışmalarına teorik ve ampirik çerçevede bir katkı sağlamayıhedeflemektedir.

As the pressure to invite international election monitors rose at the end of the Cold War, states refused to grant the United Nations a dominant role. Thus, today multiple intergovernmental, regional, and international non-governmental organizations often monitor the same elections with equal authority. This article examines the costs and benefits of this complex regime to highlight some possible broader implications of regime complexity. It argues that the availability of many different organizations facilitates action that might otherwise have been blocked for political reasons. Furthermore, when different international election monitoring agencies agree, their consensus can bolster their individual legitimacy as well as the legitimacy of the international norms they stress, and thus magnify their influence on domestic politics. Unfortunately the election monitoring example also suggests that complex regimes can engender damaging inter-organizational politics and that the different biases, capabilities, and standards of organizations sometime can lead organizations to outright contradict each other or work at cross-purposes.

This book traces the process by which national elections became international events or, more precisely, what the effects of this process are on state sovereignty. Contrary to the conventional wisdom in International Relations - to judge by the neglect of this phenomenon in the literature - this book argues that the study of IEM does not belong only in the field of comparative politics. As a system-wide phenomenon, IEM should not be restricted to the study of purely domestic politics or of foreign policy. This book contends that sovereignty has been partially transformed by the recen.