Enacted but neither regulated nor applied: exploring emigrant enfranchisement in deviant cases

Abstract

Some states that enacted external voting rights decades ago have still not regulated or applied these rights, leaving emigrants unable to participate in elections. Searching for why the emigrant enfranchisement process remains incomplete, I map countries as either typical (fast-track or slow-paced) or deviant (stagnant, interrupted, or outlier) cases. Then I review the legal background of emigrant enfranchisement in the stagnant case of Nicaragua. I examine a set of hypotheses related to economic reasons, global norms, democratisation, and political competition; the role of political actors and instrumental factors are possible bona fide explanations for the enactment of Nicaraguan external voting rights. Along with putting more weight on domestic explanations, as compared to prior cross-national and comparative studies, this article aims to enrich existent empirical analyses on emigrant enfranchisement, taking a ‘Global South’ perspective.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 10 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.