A period of serious decline in democracy

In many countries, the celebration of Democracy Day is nothing but a mockery of the continuing decline of democracy around the world. At least in countries where democracy has eroded and citizens are not free or partially free in terms of political and fundamental rights, that should be the case for citizens of those countries. As published in 2020 by Freedom House, a US think tank on democracy, the number of countries that lost their democracy last year was 74. But International Democracy Day is being celebrated on September 15 every year. The United Nations has been observing this day for 13 years. In a statement issued this year, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said democracy around the world had been hit harder by the Covid-19 epidemic, and governments were becoming more authoritarian.

Dissent is important in a democracy. But in times of crisis, especially in an omnipresent crisis like an epidemic, dissenting rulers must not tolerate dissent. The problem is that institutions that protect the right to express dissent are now ineffective and weakened. Again the political alternative is either absent, or without leadership. The title of the report, Freedom in the World 2020, seems to be a fair reflection of this: Leaderless Struggle for Democracy. Before moving on to another discussion, let me remind you that in a survey of 210 countries around the world, there are 63 countries that enjoy political and fundamental rights. There are 49 non-free countries and 63 partially free countries. Bangladesh is one of the partially free countries.

Advertising

There have been several important studies on this recent reversal of democracy. Aziz Hawk and Tom Ginsberg of the University of Chicago Law School are calling the process a constitutional setback. Their recent publication, How to Lose a Constitutional Democracy, states that authoritarian decline is the all-encompassing and rapid decline of authoritarianism. As in the case of a military coup or a state of emergency. But the retreat does not happen overnight, the elements of democracy change slowly and subtly. The three basic elements of democracy, competitive elections, the liberal right to express and organize, and the rule of law in the judiciary and administration তিন all suffer in three cases. These happen almost simultaneously. However, according to the two authors, these are so contented and slow-moving that it may at times seem completely different, and in many cases isolated, it may seem logical.

Aziz Hawke and Tom Ginsberg have analyzed the political and legal changes in Latin America, Eastern Europe and Russia and various countries in Asia, showing that constitutional backwardness is gradually being fulfilled in five specific ways. These are 1. Constitutional amendment; 2. Removing institutional equilibrium barriers; 3. Centralization and politicization of executive power; 4. Opportunities to shrink or distort public spaces or meetings and expressions and 5. Eliminate political rivals. The purpose of the constitutional amendment is to remove the barrier of repeated candidates in elections to increase the stability of power, centralize the power of appointment in different institutions from different commissions, take away the power to appoint and remove judges, appoint loyal people, restrict the independence of autonomous bodies.

Advertising

Steps taken to curb civil rights include restricting media licenses, censorship of the media, dismissal of journalists, arrests, abductions, torture, killings, abuse of criminal law, arrests of political opponents, repression, prohibition of strikes, and non-governmental organizations. Imposition of various types of control etc. Arrests of opposition leaders, vote buying, influencing the Election Commission, etc. are used as strategies to eliminate electoral competition.

Freedom House, however, in its most recent publication, in a separate study on the erosion of democracy in 29 countries in Central Europe and Central Asia, has shown that the shell of democracy is also falling in those countries. Saki, director of research at the institute, told Saki in the article "Dropping the Democratic Facade" that leaders in these transitional countries were openly attacking democratic institutions and trying to remove as much control or obstruction as possible. What is being seen now is that attacks on the independence of the judiciary have intensified, threats to civil society and the media have increased, the folly of electoral law has melted away, and parliament has become ineffective as a center of political debate and accountability. Despite demanding that these leaders in power act as a reflection of the will of the people through elections, they continue to centralize power and deprive them of political and civil rights.

In Seki's words, these events have led to a surprising collapse of democracy in 29 countries during the transition. The number of democracies in the region is lower now than at any time since 1995. Half of the authoritarian rulers in the region are using state institutions under their control to strengthen and secure their position. Researcher Mike Smeltzer writes that today's Eurasian leaders are moving towards hereditary inheritance. They are placing family members in positions of power where it will be easier to transfer power in a constitutional manner if necessary.

Advertising

The position of the judiciary has been specially discussed in these analyzes. The judiciary probably has a lot of expectations to prevent the erosion of democracy and the protection of civil and political rights. In an article published on the front page of the international edition of the New York Times on September 9, Madhav Khosla, professor of law and politics at Columbia University and Sonipat University in India, wrote: Courts and collapsing). But he has vehemently complained that the courts have now taken on the role of silent spectators and accomplices of injustice. Analyzing the rise of populist leaders in Hungary, Turkey, and India, and the weak role of the courts, he has shown that both presidential and parliamentary democracies are undermining this. The more serious part of his observation is that the court still has a position in society. However, the outcome is predetermined due to manipulation of judicial appointments.

Bangladesh was born through the struggle for democracy and rights. The history of this struggle is still going on after 50 years of independence. However, I will not go any further as the reader can judge on his own responsibility whether we have any comparison with the examples and analysis of the erosion of democracy discussed above.