What prompts governments in new democracies to investigate elected leaders once they leave office? Theorizing about democratic regimes suggests that leadership turnover by constitutional means should generate few such cases: democratic entry to and exit from office are thought to prompt benign treatment from successor administrations. Yet over a third of democratically elected presidents and prime ministers who left office between 1970 and 2011 have faced investigations for malfeasance. This study analyzes the conditions that generate such cases. We find that the odds of investigation rise when there is strong evidence of former leaders’ personal culpability; but also when the executive regime is presidential, and the judiciary lacks independence from other branches. Partisanship has a more limited impact: co-partisanship with the incumbent reduces the odds of investigation for ex-prime ministers, but sharing a party label with an incumbent offers no such protection to a former president.
Abente-BrunDiego. 2009. “Paraguay: The Unraveling of One-Party Rule.” Journal of Democracy20 (1): 143–56.
2.
AcconciaAntonioImmordinoGiovanniPiccoloSalvatoreReyPatrick. 2014. “Accomplice Witnesses and Organized Crime: Theory and Evidence from Italy.” The Scandinavian Journal of Economics116 (4): 1116–59.
3.
AltJamesLassenDavid Dreyer. 2014. “Enforcement and Public Corruption: Evidence from the American States.” The Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization30 (2): 306–38.
4.
ApergisNicholasDincerOguzhanPayneJames. 2012. “Live Free or Bribe: On the Causal Dynamics between Economic Freedom and Corruption in U.S. States.” European Journal of Political Economy28 (2): 215–26.
5.
BalanManuel. 2011. “Competition by Denunciation: The Political Dynamics of Corruption Scandals in Argentina and Chile.” Comparative Politics43 (4): 459–78.
6.
BaturoAlexander. 2010. “The Stakes of Losing Office, Term Limits and Democracy.” British Journal of Political Science40 (3): 635–62.
7.
BaturoAlexander. 2014. Democracy, Dictatorship, and Term Limits. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
8.
BaturoAlexander. 2016. “Cursus Honorum: Personal Background, Careers and Experience of Political Leaders in Democracy and Dictatorship—New Data and Analyses.” Politics and Governance4 (2): 138–57.
9.
BaturoAlexander. 2017. “Democracy, Development, and Career Trajectories of Former Political Leaders.” Comparative Political Studies50 (8): 1023–54.
10.
BoixCarlesMillerMichaelRosatoSebastian. 2012. “A Complete Dataset of Political Regimes, 1800-2007.” Comparative Political Studies46 (12): 1523–54.
11.
BrattonMichael. 2004. “The ‘Alternation Effect’ in Africa.” Journal of Democracy15 (4): 147–58.
12.
CarboneGiovanniPellegataAlessandro. 2017. “To Elect or Not to Elect: Leaders, Alternation in Power and Social Welfare in Sub-Saharan Africa.” The Journal of Development Studies53 (12): 1965–87.
13.
CareyJohn. 2007. “Competing Principals, Political Institutions, and Party Unity in Legislative Voting.” American Journal of Political Science51 (1): 92–107.
14.
ChangEric C. C.GoldenMiriamHillSeth. 2010. “Legislative Malfeasance and Political Accountability.” World Politics62 (2): 177–220.
15.
CheibubJose AntonioGandhiJenniferVreelandJames. 2010. “Democracy and Dictatorship Revisited.” Public Choice143 (1): 67–101.
16.
ChoWonbinLoganCarolyn. 2014. “Looking Toward the Future: Alternations in Power and Popular Perspectives on Democratic Durability in Africa.” Comparative Political Studies47 (1): 30–54.
17.
ColburnForrestArturo CruzS.2012. “Personalism and Populism in Nicaragua.” Journal of Democracy23 (2): 104–18.
18.
ColomboGherardo. 2006. “Investigating and Prosecuting Large-Scale Corruption: The Italian Experience.” Journal of International Criminal Justice4:510–21.
19.
ConaghanCatherine. 2012. “Prosecuting Presidents: The Politics within Ecuador’s Corruption Cases.” Journal of Latin American Studies44 (4): 649–78.
20.
CordisAdriana. 2009. “Judicial Checks on Corruption in the U.S.” Economics of Governance10 (4): 375–401.
21.
DebsAlexandreGoemansHein. 2010. “Regime Type, the Fate of Leaders, and War.” American Political Science Review104 (3): 430–45.
22.
Del PonteCarla. 2006. “Investigation and Prosecution of Large-Scale Crimes at the International Level: The Experience of the ICTY.” Journal of International Criminal Justice4:539–58.
23.
DollarDavidFismanRaymondGatiiRoberta. 2001. “Are Women Really the ‘Fairer’ Sex? Corruption and Women in Government.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization46:423–29.
24.
EpperlyBrad. 2013. “The Provision of Insurance? Judicial Independence and the Post-Tenure Fate of Leaders.” Journal of Law and Courts1 (2): 247–78.
25.
EsareyJustinChirilloGina. 2013. “‘Fairer Sex’ or Purity Myth? Corruption, Gender, and Institutional Context.” Politics & Gender9:361–89.
26.
Escriba-FolchAbel. 2013. “Accountable for What? Regime Types, Performance, and the Fate of Outgoing Dictators, 1946-2004.” Democratization20 (1): 160–85.
27.
Escriba-FolchAbelWrightJoseph. 2015. “Human Rights Prosecutions and Autocratic Survival.” International Organization69:343–73.
28.
FinkelJodi. 2008. Judicial Reform as Political Insurance: Argentina, Peru, and Mexico in the 1990s. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
29.
GinsburgTom. 2003. Judicial Review in New Democracies: Constitutional Courts in Asian Cases. New York: Cambridge University Press.
30.
GobelChristian. 2004. “Beheading the Hydra: Combating Political Corruption and Organised Crime in the KMT and DPP Eras.” China Perspectives56:61–82.
31.
GrahamBenjaminMillerMichaelCheibubJose. 2017. “Safeguarding Democracy: Powersharing and Democratic Survival.” American Political Science Review111 (4): 686–704.
32.
Hall-MatthewsDavid. 2007. “Tickling Donors and Tackling Opponents: The Anti-Corruption Campaign in Malawi.” In Corruption and Development: The Anti-Corruption Campaigns, edited by BrockingSarah, 77–102. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
33.
HeniszWitold. 2002. “The Institutional Environment for Infrastructure Investment.” Industrial and Corporate Change11 (2): 355–89.
34.
HuntingtonSamuel. 1991. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
35.
HwangLogan. 1997. “Trial of Two Former Presidents of Korea: Comparative Analysis of Constitutional Issues and Justification.” The Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law25:173–206.
36.
KingGaryZengLangche. 2001. “Logistic Regression in Rare Events Data.” Political Analysis9 (2): 137–163.
37.
KnutsenCarl HenrikWigTore. 2015. “Government Turnover and the Effects of Regime Type: How Requiring Alternation in Power Biases Against the Estimated Economic Benefits of Democracy.” Comparative Political Studies48 (7): 882–914.
38.
KunicovaJanaRose-AckermanSusan. 2005. “Electoral Rules and Constitutional Structures as Constraints on Corruption.” British Journal of Political Science35 (4): 573–606.
39.
LinzerDrewStatonJeffrey. 2015. “A Global Measure of Judicial Independence, 1948–2012.” Journal of Law and Courts3 (2): 223–56.
40.
MilanovicBrankoHoffKarlaHorowitzShale. 2010. “Turnover in Power as a Restraint on Investing in Influence: Evidence from the Postcommunist Transition.” Economics & Politics22 (3): 329–61.
41.
MoehlerDevra C.LindbergStaffan I.2009. “Narrowing the Legitimacy Gap: Turnovers as a Cause of Democratic Consolidation.” The Journal of Politics71(4): 1448–66.
42.
MorrowSean. 2006. “Toxic Mushrooms? The Presidential Third-Term Debate in Malawi.” In Legacies of Power: Leadership Change and Former Presidents in African Politics, edited by SouthallRogerMelberHenning, 151–74. Uppsala, Sweden: Nordic Africa Institute.
43.
NybladeBenjaminReedSteven. 2008. “Who Cheats? Who Loots? Political Competition and Corruption in Japan, 1947-1993.” American Journal of Political Science52 (4): 926–41.
44.
OhGrace. 1997. “Trial of Two Former Presidents of Korea: A Comparative Criminal Analysis.” The Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law25:207–32.
PrzeworskiAdam. 2015. “Acquiring the Habit of Changing Governments Through Elections.” Comparative Political Studies48 (1): 101–29.
47.
PrzeworskiAdamAlvarezMichaelCheibubJose AntonioLimongiFernando. 2000. Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950-1990. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Roht-ArriazaNaomi. 2009. “Prosecution of Heads of State in Latin America.” In Prosecuting Heads of State, edited by LutzEllenReigerCaitlin, 25–45. New York: Cambridge University Press.
50.
SamuelsDavid. 2002. “Presidentialized Parties: The Separation of Powers and Party Organization and Behavior.” Comparative Political Studies35 (4): 461–83.
51.
SamuelsDavidShugartMatthew. 2010. Presidents, Parties, and Prime Ministers: How the Separation of Powers Affects Party Organization and Behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.
52.
SouthallRogerSimutanyiNeoDanielJohn. 2006. “Former Presidents in African Politics.” In Legacies of Power: Leadership Change and Former Presidents in African Politics, edited by SouthallRogerMelberHenning, 1–25. Uppsala: Nordic Africa Institute.
53.
SwamyAnandKnackStephenLeeYoungAzfarOmar. 2001. “Gender and Corruption.” Journal of Development Economics64:25–55.
54.
TaylorScott. 2006. “Divergent Politico-Legal Responses to Past Presidential Corruption in Zambia and Kenya: Catching the ‘Big Fish,’ or Letting Him off the Hook?” Third World Quarterly27 (2): 281–301.
55.
WahmanMichael. 2014. “Democratization and Electoral Turn-overs in Sub-Saharan Africa and Beyond.” Democratization21 (2): 220–43.
56.
WoodAbby. 2009. “Charm and Punishment: How the Philippines’ Leading Man Became Its Most Famous Prisoner.” In Prosecuting Heads of State, edited by LutzEllenReigerCaitlin, 111–29. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
