This book is a welcome addition to a young but growing body of scholarly work on rule-of-law construction in new democracies from a political science perspective. Rebecca Bill Chavez develops a persuasive study of the conditions under which rule of law is more likely to emerge, through an analysis of judicial politics at the national level in Argentina and in two of its provinces, San Luis and Mendoza.

Rule of law is defined in the book as meaning effectively limited government in which the actions of public officials are subject to checks and balances through mechanisms of horizontal accountability. Rule of law not only encompasses state agents but also requires that all powerful social or economic actors be subject to controls of legality. A key indicator of rule of law, for the purposes of the study, is the degree of judicial independence in a given political system.

In turn, judicial independence is measured through five indicators: the degree to which the executive violates merit-based appointment mechanisms; the degree to which tenure protection of judges is violated; the degree to which judges' salary protection is vulnerable; variation over time in the size of supreme courts, allowing for court-packing opportunities; and the frequency with which justices rule in favor of the executive in contravention of the law (somewhat more difficult to assess). Judicial independence (and rule of law) is presented as a continuum along which different political systems move in one direction or another over time.

The book analyses the factors that explain the position of political systems on this spectrum. Rule of law is more likely to emerge in the following conditions. First, it is a more likely outcome in a context of competitive party politics and divided government. Under conditions of monolithic political party government with strong internal party discipline and unified government, there are fewer constraints bearing on the executive to refrain from waiving formal rules of separation of powers and engaging in the informal subordination of the judiciary. Second, argues Chavez, the dispersal of economic power fosters rule of law. Competing economic actors will favor strict application of laws protecting property, enforcing contracts, and mediating economic conflict. Where economic power is concentrated in a small elite group and, moreover, if it overlaps with political power, rule of law is likely to be inhibited as unfettered powerful interests will move to subvert judicial independence. A third factor is the degree to which reform coalitions in society are able to mobilize sufficiently to activate mechanisms of legal accountability (even in contexts of concentrated political and economic power). Here, the author stresses the importance of the media as a mobilizing force, and also takes into account the impact of transnational networks and international organizations.

The theoretical framework is tested through a diachronic study of the Argentine experience at the national level in rule-of-law construction and through a comparative analysis of two provinces, San Luis and Mendoza, placed at either end of the judicial independence spectrum. San Luis offers an extreme example of judicial subordination to the executive. By contrast, horizontal accountability mechanisms and judicial independence in Mendoza are exemplary. By examining the evolution of the conditions for rule-of-law construction over time through in-depth analyses of these cases, and by taking into account the indicators of judicial independence, the author is able to evaluate different combinations and sequences in the development of the factors under observation. This qualitative approach allows for a nuanced study of rule-of-law construction and an examination of the different forms of interaction over time and space. Moreover, the case studies are pertinent precisely because they show that similar formal institutional arrangements can yield very different outcomes in terms of levels of rule of law.

While the theoretical premises are developed in a careful and robust manner, they are accompanied at the outset by what might be considered a number of unnecessarily sweeping generalizations that merit more care. Notably, in line with a common tendency in Anglo-Saxon legal analysis, the author falls into the easy trap of blaming the civil law tradition for weak rule of law. While in no way excusing the authoritarian roots of the civil law tradition, it is worth signaling that the political experience of several countries in continental Europe, for instance, points to important success stories in terms of limited government and rooted democratic polities based on rule of law despite code law. While the civil law tradition, as well as the colonial legacy, are by no means irrelevant to our understanding of the workings of rule of law, the book goes a long way toward precisely demonstrating that explanatory factors for weak judicial independence may have much more to do with structural problems than with the legal tradition.

And this is wherein lies the principal contribution of The Rule of Law in Nascent Democracies. Moving on from a more formal institutionalist approach—without dismissing its relevance—the book engages in an innovative way of examining rule-of-law construction in terms of real power relations in state and society. What matters, ultimately, is the interaction between certain formal institutional arrangements and the nature of power structures—political and economic—in society. Moreover, the analysis also allows for a dynamic analysis of societal processes through the mobilization of different social actors, which can challenge power structures from below through the activation of accountability mechanisms. The international and transnational context is also identified as relevant.

Chavez has written a theoretically rigorous and innovative work on the complex question of rule-of-law construction that represents a worthy contribution to the literature. Political analysis of democratic processes in transitional societies has increasingly taken on this weighty matter of how to create working mechanisms of horizontal accountability in young democracies. This volume is a healthy reminder that we need to look beyond the formal institutional framework for an understanding of rule-of-law construction.