Dominant-party system

Last updated

A dominant-party system, or one-party dominant system, is a political occurrence in which a single political party continuously dominates election results over running opposition groups or parties. [1] Any ruling party staying in power for more than one consecutive term may be considered a dominant party (also referred to as a predominant or hegemonic party). [2] Some dominant parties were called the natural governing party, given their length of time in power. [3] [4] [5]

Contents

Dominant parties, and their domination of a state, develop out of one-sided electoral and party constellations within a multi-party system (particularly under presidential systems of governance), and as such differ from states under a one-party system, which are intricately organized around a specific party.[ citation needed ] Sometimes the term "de facto one-party state" is used to describe dominant-party systems which, unlike a one-party system, allows (at least nominally) democratic multiparty elections, but the existing practices or balance of political power effectively prevent the opposition from winning power, thus resembling a one-party state.[ citation needed ] Dominant-party systems differ from the political dynamics of other dominant multi-party constellations such as consociationalism, grand coalitions and two-party systems, which are characterized and sustained by narrow or balanced competition and cooperation.[ citation needed ]

In political literature, more than 130 dominant party systems between 1950 and 2017 were included in a list by A. A. Ostroverkhov. [6] For example, in the post-Soviet states, researchers classify parties such as United Russia and Amanat (Kazakhstan) as dominant parties on the basis that these parties have long held the majority of seats in parliament (although they do not directly form the government or appoint officials to government positions). [7] In Russian political science literature, such associations are often called "parties of power".[ citation needed ]

It is believed that a system with a dominant party can be either authoritarian or democratic. However, since there is no consensus in the global political science community on a set of mandatory features of democracy (for example, there is a point of view according to which the absence of alternation of power is, in principle, incompatible with democratic norms), [8] it is difficult to separate the two types of one-party dominance. [9]

Theory

Dominant-party systems are commonly based on majority rule for proportional representation or majority boosting in semi-proportional representation.[ citation needed ] Plurality voting systems can result in large majorities for a party with a lower percentage of the vote than in proportional representation systems due to a fractured opposition (resulting in wasted votes and a lower number of parties entering the legislature) and gerrymandering.[ citation needed ]

Critics of the "dominant party" theory argue that it views the meaning of democracy as given, and that it assumes that only a particular conception of representative democracy (in which different parties alternate frequently in power) is valid. [10] Raymond Suttner, himself a former leader in the African National Congress (ANC), argues that "the dominant party 'system' is deeply flawed as a mode of analysis and lacks explanatory capacity. But it is also a very conservative approach to politics. Its fundamental political assumptions are restricted to one form of democracy, namely electoral politics, and display hostility towards popular politics. This is manifest in the obsession with the quality of electoral opposition, and its sidelining or ignoring of popular political activity organised in other ways. The assumption in this approach is that other forms of organisation and opposition are of limited importance or a separate matter from the consolidation of their version of democracy." [10] [ non-primary source needed ][ excessive quote ]

One of the dangers of dominant parties is "the tendency of dominant parties to conflate party and state and to appoint party officials to senior positions irrespective of their having the required qualities." [10] However, in some countries this is common practice even when there is no dominant party. [10] In contrast to one-party systems, dominant-party systems can occur within a context of a democratic system as well as an authoritarian one.[ citation needed ] In a one-party system other parties are banned, but in dominant-party systems other political parties are tolerated, and (in democratic dominant-party systems) operate without overt legal impediment, but do not have a realistic chance of winning; the dominant party genuinely wins the votes of the vast majority of voters every time (or, in authoritarian systems, claims to).[ citation needed ] Under authoritarian dominant-party systems, which may be referred to as "electoralism" or "soft authoritarianism", opposition parties are legally allowed to operate, but are too weak or ineffective to seriously challenge power, perhaps through various forms of corruption, constitutional quirks that intentionally undermine the ability for an effective opposition to thrive, institutional and/or organizational conventions that support the status quo, occasional but not omnipresent political repression, or inherent cultural values averse to change.[ citation needed ]

In some states opposition parties are subject to varying degrees of official harassment and most often deal with restrictions on free speech (such as press laws), lawsuits against the opposition, and rules or electoral systems (such as gerrymandering of electoral districts) designed to put them at a disadvantage.[ citation needed ] In some cases outright electoral fraud keeps the opposition from power.[ citation needed ] However, some dominant-party systems occur, at least temporarily, in countries that are widely seen, both by their citizens and outside observers, to be textbook examples of democracy.[ citation needed ] An example of a genuine democratic dominant-party system would be the pre-Emergency India, which was almost universally viewed by all as being a democratic state, even though the only major national party at that time was the Indian National Congress.[ citation needed ] The reasons why a dominant-party system may form in such a country are often debated: supporters of the dominant party tend to argue that their party is simply doing a good job in government and the opposition continuously proposes unrealistic or unpopular changes, while supporters of the opposition tend to argue that the electoral system disfavors them (for example because it is based on the principle of first past the post), or that the dominant party receives a disproportionate amount of funding from various sources and is therefore able to mount more persuasive campaigns.[ citation needed ] In states with ethnic issues, one party may be seen as being the party for an ethnicity or race with the party for the majority ethnic, racial or religious group dominating, e.g., the African National Congress in South Africa (governing since the end of apartheid in 1994) has strong support amongst Bantu peoples of South Africa and the Ulster Unionist Party governed Northern Ireland from its creation in 1921 until 1972 with the support of the Protestant majority.[ citation needed ] Similarly, the Apartheid-era National Party in South Africa had the support of Afrikaners who make up the majority of White South Africans while English-speaking white South Africans tended towards more liberal and reform-oriented parties like the Progressive Federal Party.[ citation needed ]

Sub-national entities are often dominated by one party due to the area's demographic being on one end of the spectrum or espousing a unique local identity.[ citation needed ] For example, the current elected government of the District of Columbia has been governed by Democrats since its creation in the 1970s, Bavaria by the Christian Social Union since 1957, Madeira by the Social Democrats since 1976, and Alberta by the Progressive Conservatives from 1971 to 2015. On the other hand, where the dominant party rules nationally on a genuinely democratic basis, the opposition may be strong in one or more subnational areas, possibly even constituting a dominant party locally; an example is South Africa, where although the African National Congress is dominant at the national level, the opposition Democratic Alliance is strong to dominant in the Province of Western Cape.[ citation needed ]

Methods of dominant-party governments

In dominant-party governments, they use institutional channels, rather than repression, to influence the population. [11] Coercive distribution can control citizens and economic elites through land reform, poverty alleviation, public health, housing, education, and employment programs. [12] Further, they distribute private goods to the winning coalition (people who are necessary for its reign) in order to stay in power. [13] Giving the winning coalition private goods also prevents civil conflict. [14] They also use the education system to teach and uphold compliance. The recruiting, disciplining, and training of teachers allow for authoritarian governments to control teachers into following their objective: to foster compliance from the youth. [15] Another way that they maintain control is through hosting elections. Even though they would not be fair elections, hosting them allows citizens to feel that they have some control and a political outlet. [16] They can also enhance rule within their own state through international collaboration, by supporting and gaining the support, especially economic support, of other similar governments. [17]

Current dominant-party systems

Africa

Americas

Asia and Oceania

Eurasia

Europe

Formerly dominant parties

North America

Caribbean and Central America

South America

Europe

Asia

Africa

Oceania

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ Presidents in Singapore are not allowed to belong to any party
  2. ↑ The predecessors of the ÖVP (the Christian Social Party) ruled from 1907 until 1933 alone, with the help of the Fatherland Front from 1933 until 1934, and the Fatherland Front ruled alone from 1934 until the Anschluss of 1938.
  3. ↑ The SPÖ was previously the continuous ruling party of Vienna from 1919 until 1934, before being taken over by the Fatherland Front and the 1938 Anschluss of Austria.
  4. 1 2 Formerly its predecessors PSI (before 1924), PCI, PDS and DS.
  5. 1 2 Formerly its predecessor People's Alliance (before 1989).
  6. 1 2 The predecessors of the ÖVP are the Christian Social Party ruled from 1907 to the renaming 1933 and the Fatherland Front ruled from 1933 to the Anschluss 1938.
  7. ↑ Formerly its predecessors People's Labor Party (with SHP), People's Democracy Party, Democratic People's Party, Thousand Hope Candidates and Labour, Democracy and Freedom Bloc.

Related Research Articles

A coalition government, or coalition cabinet, is a government by political parties that enter into a power-sharing arrangement of the executive. Coalition governments usually occur when no single party has achieved an absolute majority after an election. A party not having majority is common under proportional representation, but not in nations with majoritarian electoral systems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Politics of Lithuania</span>

Politics of Lithuania takes place in a framework of a unitary semi-presidential representative democratic republic, whereby the president of Lithuania is the head of state and the prime minister of Lithuania is the head of government, and of a multi-party system.

Politics of Malaysia takes place in the framework of a federal representative democratic constitutional monarchy, in which the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is head of state and the Prime Minister of Malaysia is the head of government. Executive power is exercised by the federal government and the 13 state governments. Legislative power is vested in the federal parliament and the 13 state assemblies. The judiciary is independent of the executive and the legislature, though the executive maintains a certain level of influence in the appointment of judges to the courts.

A two-party system is a political party system in which two major political parties consistently dominate the political landscape. At any point in time, one of the two parties typically holds a majority in the legislature and is usually referred to as the majority or governing party while the other is the minority or opposition party. Around the world, the term has different meanings. For example, in the United States, the Bahamas, Jamaica, and Zimbabwe, the sense of two-party system describes an arrangement in which all or nearly all elected officials belong to either of the two major parties, and third parties rarely win any seats in the legislature. In such arrangements, two-party systems result from Duverger's law, which states that winner-take-all systems tend to produce two-party systems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Politics of Austria</span>

Politics in Austria reflects the dynamics of competition among multiple political parties, which led to the formation of a Conservative-Green coalition government for the first time in January 2020, following the snap elections of 29 September 2019, and the election of a former Green Party leader to the presidency in 2016.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Barisan Nasional</span> Political party coalition in Malaysia

The National Front, officially Barisan Nasional (BN), is a political coalition of Malaysia that was founded in 1974 as a coalition of centre-right and right-wing political parties to succeed the Alliance Party. It is the third largest political coalition with 30 seats in the Dewan Rakyat after Pakatan Harapan (PH) with 82 seats and Perikatan Nasional (PN) with 74 seats.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Austrian People's Party</span> Conservative political party in Austria

The Austrian People's Party is a Christian-democratic and liberal-conservative political party in Austria.

A minority government, minority cabinet, minority administration, or a minority parliament is a government and cabinet formed in a parliamentary system when a political party or coalition of parties does not have a majority of overall seats in the legislature. It is sworn into office, with or without the formal support of other parties, enabling a government to be formed. Under such a government, legislation can only be passed with the support or consent of enough other members of the legislature to provide a majority, encouraging multi-partisanship. In bicameral legislatures, the term relates to the situation in the chamber whose confidence is considered most crucial to the continuance in office of the government.

A national unity government, government of national unity (GNU), or national union government is a broad coalition government consisting of all parties in the legislature, usually formed during a time of war or other national emergency. A unity government according to the principles of consensus democracy lacks opposition, or opposition parties are too small and negligible.

A political realignment is a set of sharp changes in party related ideology, issues, leaders, regional bases, demographic bases, and/or the structure of powers within a government. Often also referred to as a critical election, critical realignment, or realigning election, in the academic fields of political science and political history. These changes result in a restructuring of political focus and power that lasts for decades, usually replacing an older dominant coalition. Scholars frequently invoke the concept in American elections as this is where it is most common, though the experience also does occur in governments across the globe. It is generally accepted that the United States has had five distinct party systems, each featuring two major parties attracting a consistent political coalition and following a consistent party ideology, separated by four realignments. Two of the most apparent examples include the 1896 United States presidential election, when the issues of the American Civil War political system were replaced with those of the Populist and Progressive Era. As well as the 1932 United States presidential election, when the issues of the Populist and Progressive Eras were replaced by New Deal liberalism and modern conservatism. Realigning elections also contribute significantly to realigning party systems—with 1828, for example, separating the First Party System and the Second Party System in the US.

A hung parliament is a term used in legislatures primarily under the Westminster system to describe a situation in which no single political party or pre-existing coalition has an absolute majority of legislators in a parliament or other legislature. This situation is also known as a balanced parliament, or—for local government in the United Kingdom—a parliament under no overall control (NOC). A hung parliament may result in a coalition government, a minority government, or a snap election if a government cannot be formed.

A grand coalition is an arrangement in a multi-party parliamentary system in which the two largest political parties of opposing political ideologies unite in a coalition government.

An electoral wipeout occurs when a major party wins no seats in an election - "wiped out" means no one left, from that party, in the body that has had an election. It is the opposite of a landslide victory; the two frequently go hand in hand.

General elections were held in Malaysia on 20 and 21 October 1990. Voting took place in all 180 parliamentary constituencies of Malaysia, each electing one Member of Parliament to the Dewan Rakyat, the dominant house of Parliament. State elections also took place in 351 state constituencies in 11 states of Malaysia on the same day.

In parliamentary politics, balance of power is a situation in which one or more members of a parliamentary or similar chamber can by their uncommitted vote enable a party to attain and remain in minority government. The term may also be applied to the members who hold that position. The members holding the balance of power may guarantee their support for a government by either joining it in a coalition government or by an assurance that they will vote against any motion of no confidence in the government or will abstain in such a vote. In return for such a commitment, such members may demand legislative or policy commitments from the party they are to support. A person or party may also hold a balance of power in a chamber without any commitment to government, in which case both the government and opposition groupings may on occasion need to negotiate for that person's or party's support.

A minor party is a political party that plays a smaller role than a major party in a country's politics and elections. The difference between minor and major parties can be so great that the membership total, donations, and the candidates that they are able to produce or attract are very distinct. Some of the minor parties play almost no role in a country's politics because of their low recognition, vote and donations. Minor parties often receive very small numbers of votes at an election. The method of voting can also assist or hinder a minor party's chances. For example, in an election for more than one member, the proportional representation method of voting can be advantageous to a minor party as can preference allocation from one or both of the major parties.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social Democratic Party of Austria</span> Major political party in Austria

The Social Democratic Party of Austria is a social democratic political party in Austria. Founded in 1889 as the Social Democratic Workers' Party of Austria and later known as the Socialist Party of Austria from 1945 until 1991, the party is the oldest extant political party in Austria. Along with the Austrian People's Party (ÖVP), it is one of the country's two traditional major parties. It is positioned on the centre-left on the political spectrum.

A landslide victory is an election result in which the winning candidate or party achieves a decisive victory by an overwhelming margin, securing a very large majority of votes or seats far beyond the typical competitive outcome. The term became popular in the 1800s to describe a victory in which the opposition is "buried", similar to the way in which a geological landslide buries whatever is in its path. A landslide victory for one party is often accompanied by an electoral wipeout for the opposition, as the overwhelming support for the winning side inflicts a decisive loss on its rivals. What qualifies as a landslide victory can vary depending on the type of electoral system, as the term does not entail a precise, technical, or universally agreed-upon measurement. Instead, it is used informally in everyday language, making it subject to interpretation. Even within a single electoral system, there is no consensus on the exact margin that constitutes a landslide victory.

Since its foundation in 1889, the Social Democratic Party has often been one of the main political forces in Austria. At the start of the First World War it was the strongest party in parliament, and on the ending of that war in 1918 the party leader Karl Renner became chancellor of the First Republic. The party lost power in 1920, but retained a strong base of support in the capital Vienna. A period of rising political violence culminated in the banning of the Social Democratic Party under the Austrofascist dictatorship (1934–38).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 Penang state election</span> 12th state election of Penang, held on 8 March 2008

The 12th Penang election was held on 8 March 2008. Polling took place in 40 constituencies throughout the State of Penang, with each electing a State Assemblyman to the Penang State Legislative Assembly. The election was conducted by the Malaysian Election Commission.

References

  1. ↑ Ostroverkhov, A. A. (2017). "In Searching for Theory of One-Party Dominance: World Experience of Studying Dominant-Party Systems (II)". Politeia. 87 (4): 133–149 (p. 136). doi: 10.30570/2078-5089-2017-87-4-133-149 .
  2. ↑ Ostroverkhov, A. A. (2017). "In Searching for Theory of One-Party Dominance: World Experience of Studying Dominant-Party Systems (I)". Politeia. 86 (3): 136–153 (p. 148). doi: 10.30570/2078-5089-2017-86-3-136-153 .
  3. ↑ "Natural Governing Party". The Dictionary of Canadian Politics. Campbell Strategies. 2022. Retrieved December 5, 2022.
  4. ↑ "The Wonder Boy". Hoover: An Extraordinary Life in Extraordinary Times. Knopf Doubleday. 2017. p. 338. ISBN   9780307743879. The Republicans had come to see themselves as the natural governing party of the United States. Leaving aside the Cleveland and Wilson accidents, they had been in power since Grant's day. If Republican delegates declared an uncharismatic Hoover worthy of the presidency, voters were unlikely to argue.
  5. ↑ Chin, James (November 15, 2022). "UMNO intends to return as Malaysia's natural governing party". Nikkei. Retrieved December 5, 2022.
  6. ↑ Ostroverkhov, A. A. (2017). "В поисках теории однопартийного господства: мировой опыт изучения систем с доминантной партией (II)" [In search of a theory of one-party domination: world experience in studying systems with a dominant party (II)](PDF). Politeia (in Russian). 4 (87). Archived from the original (PDF) on February 8, 2020.
  7. ↑ Isaacs, R.; Whitmore, S. (2013). "The Limited Agency and Life-Cycles of Personalized Dominant Parties in Post-Soviet Space: The Case of United Russia and Nur Otan". Democratization. 4 (21).
  8. ↑ Przeworski, A. (2000). Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 16.
  9. ↑ Ostroverkhov, A. A. (2017). "В поисках теории однопартийного господства: мировой опыт изучения систем с доминантной партией (II)" [In search of a theory of one-party domination: world experience in studying systems with a dominant party (II)](PDF). Politeia. 4 (87): 134. Archived from the original (PDF) on February 8, 2020.
  10. 1 2 3 4 Suttner, R. (2006), "Party dominance 'theory': Of what value?", Politikon 33 (3), pp. 277–297
  11. ↑ Frantz, Erica (November 15, 2018). "Authoritarianism". doi:10.1093/wentk/9780190880194.001.0001. ISBN   978-0-19-088019-4.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  12. ↑ Hassan, Mai; Mattingly, Daniel; Nugent, Elizabeth R. (May 12, 2022). "Political Control". Annual Review of Political Science. 25 (1): 155–174. doi: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-013321 . ISSN   1094-2939.
  13. ↑ Newton, Kenneth (December 24, 2020). Foundations of comparative politics : democracies of the modern world. Cambridge University Press. ISBN   978-1-108-92494-8. OCLC   1156414956.
  14. ↑ Meng, Anne (September 25, 2019). "Ruling Parties in Authoritarian Regimes: Rethinking Institutional Strength". British Journal of Political Science. 51 (2): 526–540. doi: 10.1017/s0007123419000115 . ISSN   0007-1234. S2CID   204450972.
  15. ↑ Weigele, Annika; Brandt, Cyril Owen (January 2022). "'Just keep silent'. Teaching under the control of authoritarian governments: A qualitative study of government schools in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia". International Journal of Educational Development. 88: 102497. doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102497. ISSN   0738-0593. S2CID   245164001.
  16. ↑ Hong, Hao; Wong, Tsz-Ning (May 5, 2020). "Authoritarian election as an incentive scheme". Journal of Theoretical Politics. 32 (3): 460–493. doi:10.1177/0951629820910563. ISSN   0951-6298. S2CID   13901166.
  17. ↑ von Soest, Christian (October 25, 2015). "Democracy prevention: The international collaboration of authoritarian regimes". European Journal of Political Research. 54 (4): 623–638. doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12100. ISSN   0304-4130.
  18. ↑ Mehler, Andreas; Melber, Henning; Van Walraven, Klaas (2009). Africa Yearbook: Politics, Economy and Society South of the Sahara in 2008. Leiden: Brill. p. 411. ISBN   978-90-04-17811-3.
  19. ↑ "2012 • Transformationsindex". Archived from the original on April 1, 2012. Retrieved April 1, 2012.(in English)
  20. ↑ O'Gorman, Melanie (April 26, 2012). "Why the CCM won't lose: the roots of single-party dominance in Tanzania". Journal of Contemporary African Studies . 30 (2): 313–333. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.410.9369 . doi:10.1080/02589001.2012.669566. S2CID   17134713.
  21. ↑ "Archived copy". www.un.org. Archived from the original on September 4, 2015.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  22. ↑ The state's first PAN governor, Carlos Medina Plascencia, took office on an interim basis without going to the polls.
  23. ↑ Vicente Fox was the first democratically elected PAN governor of the state.
  24. ↑ "'It's become a bit one-sided': Antony Green says the ACT has fallen into a pattern of 'forever government'. So will anything change?". ABC News. September 13, 2024. Retrieved October 29, 2024.
  25. ↑ "Kelantan Emergency of December 1977 - the Malaysian Bar".
  26. ↑ "After clean sweep, PN now fully controls Terengganu at state and federal levels". The Edge Malaysia. August 12, 2023. Retrieved December 28, 2024.
  27. ↑ "Singapore Elections Department – Parliamentary Election Results". Archived from the original on September 10, 2015. Retrieved September 9, 2015.
  28. ↑ David Aprasidze, David S. Siroky: Technocratic Populism in Hybrid Regimes: Georgia on My Mind and in My Pocket, Politics Gov., Vol. 8, No. 4 (2020).
  29. ↑ Phillip Oravec, Edward C. Holland: The Georgian Dream? Outcomes from the Summer of Protest, 2018, Demokratizatsiya, Vol. 27, No. 2 (2019), pp. 249–256.
  30. ↑ To Understand Georgia's Constitutional Reforms, Look Beyond the President, Democracy & Freedom Watch, 6 May 2017, retrieved 7 January 2023.
  31. ↑ Dresden, Cornelius Pollmer (August 31, 2014). "CDU sucht nach einem neuen Partner". Sueddeutsche.de.
  32. ↑ "Brandenburg election: Olaf Scholz's SPD narrowly beats AfD - exit polls". www.bbc.com. Retrieved September 24, 2024.
  33. ↑ "Геннадий Кернес, хозяин Харькова в инвалидном кресле". BBC News Русская служба (in Russian). Retrieved January 30, 2024.
  34. ↑ Stacey, Kiran (May 8, 2015). "SNP ends Labour domination in Scotland with election landslide". Financial Times.
  35. ↑ Cairney, Paul; McGarvey, Neil (2013). Scottish Politics. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan Limited. p. 58. ISBN   978-0-230-39046-1.
  36. ↑ "List of MLAs". Pc Alberta. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  37. ↑ Maxwell, Angie; Shields, Todd (June 24, 2019). The Long Southern Strategy: How Chasing White Voters in the South Changed American Politics. Oxford University Press.
  38. ↑ Mickey, Robert (February 19, 2015). Paths Out of Dixie: The Democratization of Authoritarian Enclaves in America's Deep South, 1944-1972. Princeton University Press.
  39. ↑ Trende, Sean. "Misunderstanding the Southern realignment". Real Clear Politics.
  40. ↑ "Bundestagswahlen – Baden-Württemberg".
  41. ↑ "Wahlen zum Europäischen Parlament in Baden-Württemberg".
  42. ↑ "Landtag Bayern 1869–1918".
  43. ↑ "Landtagswahlen im Saarland seit 1945".
  44. ↑ "Bundestagswahlen – Saarland".
  45. ↑ "Wahlen zum Europäischen Parlament im Saarland".
  46. 1 2 Bihari, Mihály (2013). "A magyarországi domináns pártrendszer". Politológia: a politika és a modern állam: pártok és ideológiák (in Hungarian). Budapest: Nemzedékek Tudása Tankönyvkiadó. pp. 291–295. ISBN   9789631976281.
  47. ↑ Part 2: Communist take-over, 1946–1949. The Institute for the History of the 1956 Revolution.
  48. ↑ "Learning to Lose: Adapting to Democracy in One Party Dominant Systems…". Archived from the original on June 4, 2014.
  49. ↑ "Turkey Under the AKP: The Era of Dominant-Party Politics". journalofdemocracy.org. January 19, 2012. Retrieved May 30, 2015.
  50. ↑ "Turkey's undecided voters are leaning towards opposition alliance". June 10, 2021. Retrieved April 8, 2022.
  51. ↑ Garnett, Mark; Lynch, Philip (2007). Exploring British Politics. London: Pearson Education. p. 322. ISBN   978-0-582-89431-0.
  52. ↑ Democracy, Peoples' (June 24, 2007). "West Bengal: How The Left Front And Its Government Emerged". Archived from the original on August 15, 2017.
  53. ↑ "GE15: PN win 14 state seats in Perlis to form government". Bernama . Astro Awani. November 20, 2022. Retrieved November 23, 2022.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.