This post got me thinking, and I don't really agree. While the term 'illiberal democracy' has fairly often been used to describe the Singaporean system, for example, I think it's a bit of a misnomer. It might depend on how you view the 'liberal' part of liberal democracy. I see liberalism as guaranteeing certain individual (and maybe group) rights even at the expense of democratic decision-making. So a perfectly democratic Islamic republic, for example, would probably be an illiberal democracy. While it's true that places like Singapore are not liberal in that sense, as many of the rights liberalism uphold are frequently ignored, the political system is problematic as far as democracy is concerned too - that is, democratic procedures or principles are (as you say) not followed to a reasonably perfect extent. As such, I think the term 'limited democracy' probably describe such systems better.