Undue Process

Abstract

Why do autocrats hold political trials when outcomes are presumed known from the start? Undue Process examines how autocrats weaponize the judiciary to stay in control. Contrary to conventional wisdom that courts constrain arbitrary power, Shen-Bayh argues that judicial processes can instead be used to legitimize dictatorship and dissuade dissent when power is contested. Focusing on sub-Saharan Africa since independence, Shen-Bayh draws on fine-grained archival data on regime threats and state repression to explain why political trials are often political purges in disguise, providing legal cover for the persecution of regime rivals. This compelling analysis reveals how courts can be used to repress political challengers, institutionalize punishment, and undermine the rule of law. Engaging and illuminating, Undue Process provides new theoretical insights into autocratic judiciaries and will interest political scientists and scholars studying authoritarian regimes, African politics, and political control.

The Mediation of Autocratic Regimes: How Local Officials Shaped Authoritarian Systems in Rwanda and Sudan

“…That is, it rarely conforms to the system as projected at the top. Following recent scholarship on the complex geographies of authoritarian orders (Hassan 2020;Letsa 2019;Tapscott 2021), work on formal and informal institutions Ochieng' Opalo 2019;Shen-Bayh 2022), and on local authoritarian enclaves (Benton 2012;Herrmann 2010), we show that the forms of translation and representation that mediation is meant to perform inherently bifurcate regime reproduction locally.…”