Journal Abstract
Volume 7 | Number 2 | Online Early Version
Online Version: ISSN No: 2708-2490
Print Version: ISSN No: 2709-0590
Price: BDT: 750.00, USD: 25.00
Publish Date: 15, March 2026
Article:
Zillur Rahman
Abstract
Why do some democratic transitions lead to the creation of sustainable institutions, and others are just political turnovers? Despite the extensive academic discussion of regime change, elite bargaining, and electoral competition, much less attention has been paid to how political legitimacy generated by mass movements translates into institutional legitimacy. This matter is especially important, as democratic consolidation depends not only on the replacement of governments but also on the gradual transformation of the institutions that exercise governmental power. This article seeks to develop the Institutional Legitimacy Framework (ILF), which elucidates the process of achieving democratic consolidation through the gradual institutionalization of political legitimacy. Contrary to the traditional interpretation of democratic consolidation as a product of successful political transition, this article defines it as a dynamic and reversible process in which the performance of institutions determines the possibility of democratic legitimacy's survival across consecutive political cycles. The empirical material of this article consists of the case study of the post-July 2024 democratic transition in Bangladesh. The July Uprising brought significant political legitimacy and provided an opportunity for constitutional, administrative, and governance reforms. The main task Bangladesh faces today, however, is not the political transition anymore but institutional transformation. Thus, success should not be measured by electoral results but rather by the government's ability to create sustainable institutions that ensure political legitimacy regardless of political leaders' turnover. Based on comparative research on democratic transition, historical institutionalism, and governance, this article contributes to the existing debate about the connection between democratic mobilization and institutional development. Although Bangladesh is used as an example, this framework may be applicable to other new democracies undergoing democratic transitions.