Legalistic autocrats: How legislative rules shape term-limit compliance and evasion

Abstract

This study examines how chamber-level voting rules influence compliance with presidential term limits in third-wave democratizers. Using a novel dataset on constitutional amendment voting rules, we analyze how joint voting and split voting shape leaders’ ability to evade term limits, particularly in anocratic regimes. The findings reveal that joint voting facilitates term-limit evasion by aggregating votes across chambers and projecting elite consensus, while split voting acts as a safeguard by enabling opposition to block amendments. These effects are most pronounced in regimes with moderate democratic levels and where the president’s party lacks a two-thirds majority. The results underscore the critical role of procedural rules in consolidating or undermining democratic norms, offering new insights into the interplay between institutional design and authoritarian resilience during democratic transitions.