@Jonathan l Poirier Welcome!

@Alex Green Hi Alex! Thanks so much for sharing! Welcome to the group! Go check out some of the previous questions I've posted, let's see if anything grabs your curiosity!

@Jonathan l Poirier In this case, the legal framework would tell you a lot about the formal rules for leadership elections within the party - the party's bylaws, and how they constrain the actors and "shape the game". Of course, actors will try to find loopholes to exploit - maybe someone tried that this time?

@Isaac George Mukundane Subterfuge is not a concept we use for analysis in political science. However, we have plenty of theories describing why a government may say one thing and do another. Brunsson's theory "organized hypocrisy" is one such theory. Basically, he argues that governments have to try to satifsy many different stakeholders - voters, interest groups, internal party cliques, etc. So it will say one thing to voters (who can't see what goes on behind the scenes) and do another thing (that voters might not see) to satisfy an internal party clique. Symbolic interactionism argues that a lot of things governments project to the public is more about symbols to gain voter favour than substantive action.- We have more theories like those if you are curious!