Democracy and Its Features

Democracy:

• The word democracy comes from the Greek word ‘Demokratia’. In Greek ‘demos’ means, people and ‘kratia’ means the rule. Democracy means “rule of the people”.
  
  

  Abraham Lincoln

  "Democracy is the government of the people, by the people, and for the people." - Abraham Lincoln (1863)

• In simple terms, Democracy is a form of government in which the rulers are elected by the people. This definition allows us to separate democracy from forms of government that are clearly not democratic. For Example -

1. Monarchy: Monarchy is a political system in which supreme authority is vested in the monarch. A king or queen is the Head of State. This is not because the people have chosen them to do so but because they happen to be born into the royal family. Saudi Arabia, The United Kingdom are examples of Monarchies.
2. Dictatorship: A dictatorship is a form of government where one person, or a small group of individuals, has real power to impose constitutional restraints. Those who happened to be in control of the army became the rulers of the country. People had no say in this decision. China, North Korea, and Myanmar are examples of dictatorships.

• Even so, this simple definition is insufficient. It reminds us that democracy is people’s rule. But if we use this definition in an unthinking manner, we would end up calling almost every government that holds an election a democracy. That's why we need to carefully distinguish between a government that is democratic and one that is non-democratic.

Features of Democracy:

1. Major Decisions by elected leaders: 

• In October 1999, General Pervez Musharraf successfully led a military coup in Pakistan. He ousted a democratically elected administration and proclaimed himself the nation's 'Chief Executive'. Later, he changed his title to President, and in 2002 the nation held a referendum to extend his term by an additional five years. The referendum, according to the Pakistan media, human rights organizations, and democratic activists, was founded on fraud and malpractices. He published a "Legal Framework Order" in August 2002 that altered Pakistan's Constitution. The President may dissolve the national and provincial assemblies following the passage of this law. Elections have been placed in Pakistan, and elected officials are given some authority. However, military leaders, including General Musharraf, had the ultimate power.
• It is obvious that Pakistan under General Musharraf should not be referred to as a democracy for a variety of reasons. But let's concentrate on one of these. Despite the fact that Pakistan's citizens elect their leaders for national and provincial assemblies, they did not actually rule. They are unable to make the ultimate decisions. General Musharraf and army officials held the authority to make final decisions; none of them were chosen by the general populace. This occurs in a lot of monarchs and dictators. The real authority was not locally elected officials in some countries but rather with some outsider powers. People's rule is not what is happening here.
• In a democracy, individuals chosen by the public must have the final authority in all decisions.

2. Free and Fair electoral competition:

• China Parliament, the Quanguo Renmin Daibiao Dahui (National people's congress), is chosen in regular elections that take place every five years. It is within the purview of the National people's congress to choose the nation's leader. Over 3,000 people from all over china were voted to serve on it. The military chooses a few members. Candidate permission from the Chinese Communist Party is required before running in elections. Elections that took place in 2002-03 were only open to people who affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party or eight other smaller parties. It is always the Communist Party that forms the government.
• Mexico has had presidential elections every six years since it gained independence in 1930. The nation has never been governed by the military or a tyrant. But a party called PRI won every election up to 2000. (Institutional Revolutionary Party). Elections were challenged by opposition parties, but they were never successful. Election-winning dirty practices of the PRI were well-known. Everyone who worked for the government was required to go to its party gatherings. Government school teachers once coerced parents into voting for the PRI. The opposition political parties' actions were generally disregarded by the media, with the exception of criticism. Voters found it challenging to cast their ballots because polling places were occasionally moved at the last minute. The PRI invested a significant amount of cash in the campaigns of its candidates.
• We get the impression that there are numerous issues with this after reading these samples. The election in China doesn't give voters any meaningful options. They must select the ruling party and its chosen candidates. People in the Mexican case appeared to have a choice, but in reality, they were powerless to choose one. Even if people were against the ruling party, there was no way it could be stopped. These elections are not fair. A genuine selection of political options must be shown during the elections. Additionally, if people so choose, they should be able to overthrow the current leadership.
• Therefore, the foundation of democracy must be free and fair elections in which the governing party has a reasonable possibility of losing.

3. One person, one vote, one value:

• We have read about the connection between the push for universal adult suffrage and the fight for democracy. Today, nearly everyone in the world accepts this principle. However, there are numerous cases where equal voting rights are denied. 
  (1) Women were not allowed to vote in Saudi Arabia until 2015.
  (2) Estonia's citizenship laws make it difficult for members of the Russian minority to obtain the right to vote.
  (3) The voting process in Fiji is set up so that an indigenous Fijian's vote has more weight than an Indian- Fijian's.
• Political equality is a core tenet of democracy. Each adult citizen must have one vote and one value in a democracy.
• After India gained its independence, all such clauses were removed, and the Indian constitution secured adult voting by granting men and women over 21 the same right to vote. Later, the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18, giving young people in India the chance to participate in politics.

4. Rule of law and respect for rights:

• In 1980, Zimbabwe won its freedom from a White minority government. Since that time, ZANU-PF, the party that led the independence movement, has dominated the nation. Since the nation's independence, Robert Mugabe has served as its leader. Regular elections were held, and ZANU-PF consistently won. Although President Mugabe was well-liked, he also engaged in unethical election procedures. His government amended the constitution multiple times over the years to give the President more authority and reduce his accountability. Workers from the opposition party were bullied, and their meeting was interrupted. The administration deemed public protests and rallies against it to be unlawful. A statute set restrictions on the ability to criticize the president. Radio and television were governed by the government and only broadcast the official line. Although there were independent media, the government persecuted any journalists who opposed it. The administration pressured judges and disregarded several court rulings that were against it. In 2017, he was ejected from office.
• Zimbabwe serves as a reminder that, while vital for democracy, popular support for the government is insufficient. Popular administrations are sometimes not democratic. Autocratic leaders are sometimes favoured. Elections must be considered if we are to evaluate a democracy. However, it is equally crucial to look at all sides of the election. The time leading up to elections should allow for enough regular political activity, including political opposition. This necessitates that the government upholds some fundamental liberties of the populace. They ought to have the freedom to think for themselves, establish associations, voice their thoughts publicly, protest, and engage in other political activities. In the eyes of the law, everyone ought to be equal. These rights must be upheld by an independent judiciary, whose decisions are followed by all. Similar restrictions apply to how a government is administrated once elections have been held. Simply because it won an election does not give a democratic administration the right to act however it pleases. It must abide by a few fundamental laws. It must, in particular, adhere to certain minority guarantees. A number of consultations must be held before making any significant decisions.  The constitution and the legislation grant specific rights and duties to each officeholder. Each of the is answerable to other impartial officials in addition to the general public.
• Democratic government rules are within limits set by constitutional law and citizens’ rights.

5. Decentralisation of Democracy:

• Decentralization prevents the abuse of authority and gives the general public a chance to participate in politics.
• The provisions for democratic decentralization are included in the Directive  Principles of State Policy.
• Empowering local self-government to achieve true democratic governance is one of these crucial provisions. Several attempts at democratic decentralization were tried after the country gained its independence.
• The 73rd and 74th amendments to the Indian Constitution, which gave local self-governing entities constitutional status and expanded their authority, are one such significant endeavour.

6. Right to Information (RTI 2005):

• Democracy must include the participation of the people. Opportunities for citizen participation and engagement with the government must be established. A closer relationship of trust between the people and their government is facilitated through improved communication between the two.
• The general public has a right to information about how their government operates. The right to information was granted by the Indian government to its citizens in order to uphold the principles of good governance, which include accountability and transparency.
• The right to information has increased government transparency and decreased the level of opacity in how it operates. The entire strategy for democratic changes has changed since the year 2000. Reforms that promote democracy are viewed as the "rights" of citizens.