From democratic theory to practice

So far, we have discussed what democracy and political participation are in theory. We saw that, ideally, a democracy functions on the basis of the formal exercise of political and civic rights (freedom of expression, of association, etc.), the full political participation of people (i.e. every citizen should have a say in matters that affect his/her life), an accountable and transparent government and well-functioning electoral institutions, etc. In practice, however, these democratic ideals are never fully observed. Contrasting the practice of democracy with its ideal, Drèze and Sen (2002, p347) observe that the actual practice of democratic ideals in a given society critically depends on a large array of factors. They cite the following: first, the practice of democracy depends on the extent of political participation, like election turnouts, the number of political parties, and the number of people who present themselves in elections. If a leader is elected with only 30 per cent of the electorate voting, his or her decisions can hardly been seen as representative of the wishes of the population. Or if citizens can only vote for two, and indeed perhaps only one, candidate, one cannot argue that the holding of elections was an entirely

DEMOCRACY AND POLITICAL PARTICIPATION

democratic practice. Another factor that Drèze and Sen single out is public awareness of political processes, as well as policy decisions and implications. For example, the public should have access to complete information about the social consequences of a certain policy decision. If a government makes the case for, say, a certain type of trade policy, the public should have access to the information about the consequences of that policy. If the democratically- elected government hides crucial information, such as the impact assessment of the trade policy on the livelihoods of poor farmers but publicizes widely the impact of the policy on large-scale producers, that government could not be said to be ‘democratic’. Also, democratic practice depends on the vigour of the opposition to the ruling political party. An elected government may eliminate by intimidation members of the opposition – by threatening voters that, for example, their house might be demolished if they are seen to be supporting the opposition. Linked to this is the nature of popular organizations at the grassroots level. Democratic practice depends on lively civil society organizations, which are accountable to the people they serve. Finally, Drèze and Sen stress the distribution of power in the country as a major factor impeding democratic ideals, a point we shall examine in greater detail later.

Among other factors that disrupt democratic institutions are inefficiency, corruption, incompetency of the bureaucracy and lack of motivation (Drèze and Sen, 2002, p352). In some countries, some legal cases might take years to receive a hearing in courts. Some might never be heard at all. Corruption, which Transparency International defines as ‘the misuse of entrusted power for

private gain’, 3 may dramatically affect the depth of democratic institutions and their ability to respond to people’s claims in some contexts. When bribes largely dwindle the public resources available for the financing of public goods, or when people have to bribe their doctor in order to receive health treatment, or bribe the teacher in order for their children to receive education, this certainly undermines the quality of democracy, even if the country may guarantee ‘free and fair elections’, freedom of information, association and other civil and political rights. Another democratic dysfunction that Drèze and Sen highlight is the lack of skill among civil servants who work in democratic institutions – an electoral commissioner might not be familiar with electoral law, for example. Moreover, civil servants might lack motivation to conduct their work, creating a significant backlog of demands unmet – often typical in legal services.

At a more basic level, a frequent cause for the lack of translation of democratic ideals into practice, or even the democratic functioning of democratic institutions, is the lack of an appropriate democratic political culture – political culture being defined as the attitudes, beliefs and values that underlie

a political system itself (Burnell and Randall, 2008, p278). Democracy is not just a matter of writing a new constitution or establishing democratic institutions. Mentalities have to be prepared as well. As the Human Development Report 2002 put it, in relation to the lasting influence of the military in some democratic countries, ‘Old habits die hard’ (p88). The report

TOPICS

gives the example of Nigeria, where the armed forces overturned democratically-elected leaders in the 1990s, and continue to hold strategic political and economic positions, such as in the oil industry. When a country has known a dictatorship, military or civilian, it is difficult to break the authoritarian political culture or to suddenly curb the power of the military.

In a study on democratization, Whitehead (2002) insightfully pointed out that it is one thing to design democratic institutions and quite another to edu- cate or persuade citizens to live by democratic precepts. In the Dominican Republic, for example, where the dictator Trujillo ruled for 31 years until 1961, the country continues to struggle to transform its clientelist political culture into a democratic one to this day. In a political survey conducted in 2001, 86 per cent of Dominicans still identified the role of a good president with a paternalist figure who should solve the problems directly affecting their lives. Clientelism can certainly survive within democratic institutions. Demo- cracy requires a political culture where people have attitudes that express democratic practices and values, such as the attitude of considering oneself as

a citizen with rights and not the client of a patron. Box 8.4 provides a further illustration of clientelistic political practices – sometimes violent ones – which are able to survive within democratic institutions.

From democratic theory to practice