Explaining Myanmar's hluttaw, 2011-2016: transitional legitimacy and the politics of legislative autonomy

Abstract

Transitional legislatures are essential institutions for entrenching democracy by providing legitimacy and by constraining the executive. This research examines the role of Myanmar's legislature (the Hluttaw) during the country's transition from the direct military rule. When it first met in January 2011, there was little disagreement that Myanmar's legislature would serve as a rubber stamp because of the overwhelming majority of representatives from the ruling pro-military party and the military itself. Yet the Hluttaw emerged as a reform-minded lawmaking body as well as a forum for oversight of the executive. Lawmakers from the minor and ethnic parties actively engaged in the legislature alongside lawmakers from the ruling party, especially those who were pressured to contest the 2010 election. This research analyses the role of Myanmar's legislature against four major transitional functions: (i) achieving legislative autonomy; (ii) a driving force in political and structural reform; (iii) realising democratic norms; and (iv) tackling transitional conflicts. Based on this conceptual framework, the dissertation asks, what role did Myanmar's first legislature play during the transition from the military rule? And what were the determining factors? It argues that the Hluttaw provided transitional legitimacy by achieving legislative autonomy but its authoritarian form, and its political competition with the executive, stopped the Hluttaw from becoming a driving force in Myanmar's transition. The dissertation also introduces the three major factors responsible for the shift from a rubber stamp to a robust legislature: (i) the speakers; (ii) non-partisanship; and (iii) co-opted lawmakers. The nexus between these factors explains what influenced the Hluttaw as well as how the Hluttaw became institutionally stronger. This research contributes to the scholarly understanding of transitional legislatures by developing a conceptual framework about how legislatures play a role in political transition as well as an explanation about how institutional rivalry can create authoritarian splits. This analysis is based on five months of fieldwork in the national legislature in Nay Pyi Taw, and the sub-national legislatures in Myanmar's States and Regions, and content analysis of the records of the legislative plenary sessions (2011-2016).