Elections prerequisite for democracy

Ronald Meinardus, Resident Representative, Friedrich-Naumann-Foundation, Manila

In most countries, elections attract enormous public attention. This is not surprising as these political exercises constitute the heart of the democratic order. The selection of political leaders by the people represents the very basis of democratic governance. Translated into English, the originally Greek word "Democracy" means "rule of the people".

In most democracies today, popular political participation is confined to the selection of leaders on election-day every few years. Still, the exercise of popular voting gives political legitimacy to the people's representatives. This legitimacy is essential also for the stability of the democratic constitutional order.

In countries where the election process is flawed the political leadership lacks legitimacy. Often this is the source of political instability, if not turmoil. Elections and democracy are like two wheels of a cart. If you remove one wheel the vehicle cannot move forward.

Democratic rule is inconceivable without elections. A ruler who does away with elections is rightfully called a dictator. The very essence of democratic rule lies in the limitation of political power. In democratic orders, various methods are applied to curb power.

In a democracy the power of the government is always limited by time. All constitutions include provisions that limit the terms of political leaders; in some democratic countries, political leaders are even explicitly excluded from running for office after a stated period.

In essence, elections and democracy are about sharing and checking political power and control. I would argue that the better the system of checks and balances functions, the better the quality of democracy in a specific country.

In most democracies today, the division of power is not limited to the classical separation between the three traditional powers -- the legislative, the executive and the judiciary. In addition to what political scientists have termed horizontal division of power (the separation of the parliament, the government and the courts), what may be termed a vertical division of power is important. This refers to the splitting up of power between the central government and the different units of local autonomy.

The most advanced system of political decentralization is federalism. While I have heard many arguments for and against this model, it is undisputed that a federal set-up enhances the system of checks and balances which is so vital for democratic governance.

While on the one hand democracy is inconceivable without elections, political elections alone are no guarantee for democratic governance. Put differently, one cannot be a democrat without supporting elections, but one can very well conduct elections without being a democrat. In many parts of the world, democratically elected governments ignore constitutional limits and deprive the people of basic human rights and freedoms.

In his acclaimed book The Future of Freedom. Illiberal Democracy, American journalist Fareed Zakaria enumerates a long list of what he terms "elected autocrats". He writes that, "Over the past decade, elected governments claiming to represent the people have steadily encroached on the powers and the rights of other elements of society." The author draws a clear line between liberal democracy and the illiberal deviation which he calls "illiberal democracy".

While liberal democracy is characterized by competitive elections, the rule of law, the separation of powers and the protection of basic political liberties, "illiberal democracy" may well permit competitive elections, but shows little respect for the aforementioned basic liberal rights.

For a country to qualify as a liberal democracy the holding of political elections every few years is not enough. "As a sparrow doesn't make a spring, an election doesn't make democracy," Sam Rainsy, the leader of the Cambodian opposition said at the recent Liberal International Asian Conference held in Taiwan which was attended by more than 100 political leaders from over twenty countries.

While Fareed Zakharia focuses on "illiberal democracies" in central Asia, the Muslim world and Russia in his book, Cambodia is also a good example of a country with elections but serious shortcomings in terms of the rule of law and the respect for civil liberties. "The real difficulty," says Sam Rainsy, "is the communist legacy and the lack of separation between the state apparatus and the ruling party." This brings us back to the importance of checks and balances.

Addressing the leaders from liberal parties at the conference in Taiwan, Lord Russel-Johnston, the former president of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, defined five key features which -- from a liberal vantage point -- are necessary for the consolidation of democracy.

First, the electorate should be offered a political choice. This is where ideological political parties with programs or platforms come in. Second, the opposition should be an integral part of democracy. For liberal democracy to flourish, the opposition must defend the political structures and be loyal to the constitution. Third, the bureaucracy must be reliable and fourth, the rule of law must be respected by everyone.

According to Lord Russel, the final prerequisite for a liberal democracy is the existence of civil society made up of non- governmental organizations, trade unions and other interest groups. Alongside the elected political establishment, the state institutions and the political parties these groups play an important complimentary role in a liberal democracy.

In a way, civil society-groups form a bridge between the people and the state. They offer an avenue for political participation which representative parliamentary rule and elections with intervals of some years cannot possibly provide. The relevance of civil society increases in societies whose political institutions lack maturity. Unfortunately this is the case in most new democracies.