Parliamentary Democracy

Is There a Perfect Model?

Nicholas Hopkinson

• Publisher: Taylor & Francis
• Year: 2017
• Print ISBN: 9780367250171
• eBook ISBN: 9781351768085
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Sociology
• Index: Social Sciences

This title was first published in 2001. With the collapse of Communism in Central and Eastern Europe, the legitimacy of one-party, and often one-person rule in other parts of the world has been fundamentally challenged. It appears that for the first time parliamentary democracy has become the universally accepted model to adopt or to be perfected. Newer democracies have started to build the institutions and capacity necessary to sustain democracy, while established democracies continue to refine their democracy, sometimes introducing full-scale reforms. This book examines whether elements of the perfect democracy can be identified and how democratic structures and practices can be improved.

1 Democracy and Good Government

Although there is no perfect democracy, the concept of democracy is innate. Democracy is an almost universally recognized ideal as well as a goal. It is based on common values shared by most people throughout the world irrespective of cultural, political, social and economic differences. Democracy, in practice, varies from one country to another, and must take account of changing needs and aspirations of the people, as well as national realities and requirements. However, certain core features of democracy are common. As an ideal, democracy aims essentially to preserve and promote the dignity and fundamental rights of the individual, to achieve social justice, foster the economic and social development of the community and strengthen the cohesion of society, as well as to create a climate that is favourable for international peace. As a form of government, democracy is widely perceived as the best way to achieve these objectives. It is also considered as the only political system that has the capacity for self-correction.

What is Democracy?

This section is largely based upon a paper by the Hon. P. Shiv Shanker, Member of the Lok Sabha in New Delhi.

Many scholars and Parliamentarians have attempted to define democracy. The concept, first elaborated by the Greeks, suggests that democracy is government of the people for the people by the people. In broader terms, democracy refers to a system of governance where government is accountable to the voters, where there is observance of basic human rights and the rule of law, and where there are free and fair elections at regular intervals. Such elections must be held on the basis of universal and equal suffrage so that all voters can choose their representatives from competing parties in conditions of equality, openness and transparency.

A state of democracy ensures that the processes by which power is acceded to, wielded and alternated, allow for free political competition. Democracy provides for open, free and non-discriminatory participation by the people in the political process, exercised in accordance with the rule of law, in both letter and spirit.

Democracy is founded on the right of everyone to take part in the management of public affairs; it therefore requires the existence of representative institutions at all levels and, in particular, a Parliament in which all components of society are represented and which has the requisite powers and means to express the will of the people by legislating and overseeing government action. Democracy is not tantamount to the law of the majority; it must also respect the rights of minorities. Democratic institutions and processes must therefore include decentralized local and regional government and administration which make it possible to broaden the base of public participation.

The state must ensure the enjoyment of civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights of its citizens. Democracy thus goes hand in hand with an effective, honest and transparent government, freely chosen and accountable, for its management of public affairs. Public accountability applies to all those who hold public authority, whether elected or non-elected, and to all bodies of public authority without exception. Accountability thus entails public right of access to information about the activities of government, the right to petition government and to seek redress through impartial administrative and judicial mechanisms. Judicial institutions and independent, impartial and effective oversight mechanisms are the guarantors for the rule of law on which democracy is founded. In order for these institutions and mechanisms to fully ensure respect for the rules, improve the fairness of the processes and redress injustices, there must be access by all to administrative and judicial remedies on the basis of equality as well as respect for administrative and judicial decisions both by the organs of the state and representatives of public authority and by each member of the society.

The existence of an active civil society and participative electorate is an essential element of democracy. It is therefore necessary to develop conditions conducive to the genuine exercise of participatory rights, while elminating obstacles that prevent, hinder or inhibit this exercise. A democratic society must be committed to education in the broadest sense of the term, and more particularly to imparting civil education for moulding responsible citizens. In its overall effort for development, society must be committed to satisfying the basic economic needs of the most disadvantaged, thus ensuring their full integration in the democratic processes.

Democracy is often perceived as an ideal goal, likely never to be attained, but always meritorious enough to be pursued with commitment and good faith. But to understand what is sought to be achieved is not enough, for without democratic processes, which need constant enhancement of their effectiveness and integrity, democracy as a goal can never be achieved.

Should anyone continue to doubt the need for democracy, one should picture a world without it. Sound democratic structures and practice are the best means to prevent unrest and conflict. One need look no further than the weaknesses in Germany’s Weimar Republic in the 1920s and 1930s, which resulted in Adolf Hitler’s dictatorship and, ultimately, World War Two.

What is Good Government?

It is a moot point whether democracy should be equated with the basic tenets of good government. However, the fact that adherence, or attempts to adhere, to the principles of good government is the most widely applied form of democracy today suggests that such an equation is not unreasonable.

A core shared value which links all Commonwealth nations is their adherence to a democratic form of government. Commonwealth heads of government stated this tenet publicly in the 1971 Singapore Declaration, and the 1991 Commonwealth Harare Declaration was arguably one of the first major international documents to elaborate what good government is. Good government has three basic universal principles:

1 accountability, which requires transparency, political pluralism with regular free and fair multi-party elections, respect for the rule of law, and free expression, including a free press. A good government respects the people because it is accountable and it ensures that they are able to participate fully in the decisions taken on their behalf;

2 respect for the individual, that is respect for human rights, and an independent and efficient judiciary to give redress to all individuals, including the poor equally with the rich;

3 competence – an efficient well-trained public service must carry out sound economic policies, including the operation of a stable currency and creating the legal and regulatory environment to enable the operation of market forces; it must rid itself of corruption, and must ensure that resources are allocated prudently according to sensible priorities. This involves restricting military expenditure to what is necessary and affordable, and giving priority to basics like primary education and health care. A good government should not try to do what the private sector can do more efficiently.

Good government is more than a checklist of different elements, and so cannot be fully achieved if one of its elements is missing, as this will undermine the efficacy of other elements. There cannot be good government if those in power do not enjoy legitimacy, are not accountable and allow no channels for dissent, or mechanisms for their own removal at the will of the people. Equally, there cannot be good government if the state, for example, is unable to deliver the most basic needs of its citizenry.

Implementing good government does not require countries to copy Western models, but to find their own ways forward. Western governments should be careful in advocating their own political models because, even though they may function well at home, they are not perfect and they may function less well in another national context. The rest of this chapter looks at some of the key ingredients of good government in greater depth.

Multi-party Democracy

The existence of a multi-party democracy is only one of several elements that sustain democracy, and it should not be discarded because the other elements of good government are absent or weak. Multi-party democracy needs to be reinforced in particular by the development of civic society, freedom of the press, and an independent judiciary and civil service. A multi-party system improves public scrutiny, debate and feedback about government policy. Democratically elected governments demonstrate more responsiveness to the needs of a wider range of citizens. A multi-party system is also better for business because more information is freely available.

A single-party system removes all democratic checks and balances. Power is centralized and few party members are willing to take the risk of opposing or disagreeing with the all-powerful head of government. Opposition outside the party is unable to express itself because membership in the single party is the only accepted form of political participation. It is thus easier to suppress opposition in a single political party system than in a multi-party one.

There can be difficulties importing a multi-party system into certain circumstances. In some countries, elections can exacerbate divisions before, during and after the elections. Politicians can appeal to and manipulate tribal, ethnic, religious or regional differences in election campaigns. In Africa, an election is often perceived as the culmination of a political contest in which the winner takes all. Incumbents may fear for themselves, their families and colleagues in the event of losing office. For example, in Burundi, Tutsi elements in the army found it too humiliating to accept the overwhelming victory of the predominantly Hutu-led party in one early 1990s election, and so they proceeded to oust the new Hutu leadership. To alleviate the fears of losers, incumbents should be allowed to retain some of their powers and privileges. Alternatively, a law, such as that operated successfully in Benin, could grant immunity to the outgoing government.

Ethnic cleavages have also been exploited in election campaigns in Caribbean states such as Trinidad and Tobago. Smaller islands within multi-island states, such as Antigua-Barbuda, St Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla and Trinidad and Tobago, have complained of marginalization, over-centralization and receiving fewer resources.

Some therefore argue against multi-party elections, simply out of fear that conflicts may be triggered, or exacerbated, by their conduct. They argue that wide income disparities, poverty, low levels of literacy, large numbers of peasants and a small middle class in many developing countries are poor foundations for democracy. By contrast, multi-party systems in industrialized countries are underpinned by high standards of living, a well-functioning market system and socioeconomic systems which took many years to develop. These arguments have been used to justify non-party elections in Uganda, whose system may represent a democratic alternative to multi-party democracy (see Chapter 9). However, such arguments are dangerous in that they can be used to legitimate the withholding or suspension of democracy. Multi-party democracy will probably remain the only universally fashionable political model in the future, but it will not be the only functional model.

Independence of Public Servants

In spite of popular misperceptions, unelected bodies can and do represent the public interest. That some branches of government, such as the civil service, central banks and the judiciary, and their officials are not elected does not mean they are unacountable. Officials in the civil service are accountable via their ministers to Parliament and there are mechanisms, such as parliamentary committees, for other public servants to explain their actions to Parliament.

Central bankers, the judiciary and other public servants need both staff continuity and independence to insulate themselves from political pressure. Professional employees must be recruited for their expertise, rather than be directly accountable to the electorate. For example, it is increasingly accepted that monetary policy is best conducted by independent central bankers rather than governments. Ministers can be tempted to lower interest and tax rates and increase public spending to create an inflationary mini economic boom before an election, in order to enhance their chances of re-election.

In order to retain independence within a political environment, civil servants must offer unbiased and honest advice. Where advice is rejected, it is their duty to cooperate in taking legitimate steps to implement policies. The independence of civil servants can be preserved through disciplinary control being vested in an independent body not subject to political pressure. If they are found guilty of any malpractice or corruption, severe sanctions should be imposed. However, it must be recognized that it is easier for civil servants in developed countries, with a long-established professional service and higher pay, to assert their independence than for their counterparts in developing countries.

An independent judiciary and the legislature must cooperate to control the executive, but they must conflict to maintain a reasonable balance between continuity and change in the rules that govern society. Just as the judicial branch can protect the legislature by declaring executive decrees unconstitutional, the legislature must protect the judiciary from politically expedient appointments by the executive. Longer-term appointments give the judiciary room to act in the interest of public order and the constitution.

Efficient Public Administration

The civil service operates in a political environment. Administrators must understand the political values and implications of the programmes on which they work. Public administration is ineffective if it is not supporting good policies. Equally, good government cannot be achieved without efficient public administration. A competent and impartial civil service is needed to ensure execution as well as development of government policy, and to advise ministers on their powers and limits. The politician may have a mistaken notion about what is good for the country, but in all spheres of public activity he or she must have the respect of the administrator. An appropriate relationship between political and administrative arms of government is therefore important to maintaining the credibility of and support for the democratic process as a whole.

The function of a professional civil service in a multi-party democracy is to inform ministers and, through them, Parliament with complete and accurate data, presented objectively and in time; advise ministers by providing analyses of data and appraisal of options in which they can have confidence; implement ministerial decisions and administer resulting legislation; and to account to ministers and Parliament for their actions, or inaction, with particular reference to the safeguarding of public funds and ensuring effective value for money.

The provisions of the United Kingdom’s House of Commons Treasury and Civil Service Select Committee’s Civil Service Code of Conduct are universal in their relevance:

the constitutional and practical role of the civil service is, with integrity, honesty, impartiality and objectivity, to assist the duly constituted government, of whatever political complexion, in formulating policies of the government, carrying out decisions of the government and in administering public services for which the government is responsible … civil servants should make all information relevant to a decision available to Ministers. They should not deceive or knowingly mislead Ministers, Parliament or the public; civil servants should endeavour to deal with the affairs of the public sympathetically, efficiently, promptly and without bias or maladministration; civil servants should endeavour to ensure the proper, effective and efficient use of public money within their control; civil servants should not make use of their official position or information acquired in the course of their official duties to further their private interests or those of others. They should not receive benefits of any kind from a third party which might reasonably be seen to compromise their personal judgment or integrity; civil servants should not seek to frustrate the policies, decisions or actions of government by declining to take, or abstaining from, action which flows from ministerial decisions.¹

Standards of public administration can decline if (a) the civil service lacks independence and skills to make the political leadership conscious of the need for alternative approaches. Civil servants have sometimes acted as if their survival or career advancement depended upon being partisan; (b) leaders become autocratic and unchallenged. It is questionable whether a civil service can serve with commitment a government that becomes autocratic, and if it can remain accountable without an effective democratic government and legislature to which it can give account; (c) the lack of freedom of thought and expression limits ‘feedback’ on inadequate policies and delays their modification or even reversal. There must be a climate for a lively and informed policy debate, and there must be channels through which grievances can be addressed; (d) a constitution or employment policy calls for a ‘balanced civil service’ with staff recruited pro rata from different ethnic or religious groups, when this is inconsistent with the principle of recruitment on the basis of merit; and if (e) low wages are paid to civil servants. It is important that civil servants’ conditions of service, emoluments and pensions are relatively favourable, thus reducing any temptation to resort to outside sources of remuneration, including bribes, to maintain a proper standard of living.

A public service is not efficient, no matter how capable, if it is serving policy ends that are faulty by either ministerial design or incompetence. Examples of improper policy ends, to be found in both developing and developed countries, are public policy made by suppressing information which would invalidate it; publicly financed housing allocated according to tribe, party or religion rather than need; public property offered for sale to friends at below market prices; and public assets being allowed to deteriorate by deliberate neglect. Furthermore, some fear that governments in developed countries increasingly make, or avoid, decisions based upon assessment of the popular mood as measured by opinion polls and, more recently, interactive focus group research. In so doing, gove...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Foreword
• Preface
• Introduction
• 1 Democracy and Good Government
• 2 To What Extent Should Cultural Values and the National Context Determine Democratic Practice?
• 3 Adapting Democracy to National Circumstances
• 4 Free and Fair Elections
• 5 Representation, Political Parties and Direct Democracy
• 6 Ensuring Parliamentarians are Representative
• 7 Improving the Effectiveness of Parliament
• 8 Is There a Correlation between Democracy and Development?
• 9 Case Studies
• 10 Conclusions
• Appendix: List of Participants