Democratic backsliding remains a threat to democracy across the globe, with elected political leaders in many countries using their political mandate to dilute constitutional protections and weaken democratic institutions. Joep van Lit and Carolien van Ham explain the seven key modes of ‘autocratisation’ and their creation of a ‘shopping list’ of autocratic behaviours that offers a practical resource to recognise early warning signs of democratic recession.
Continue readingTag Archives: democratic backsliding
MPs’ role in the constitution
MPs play a central role in all democratic systems, but this is particularly true in the UK given its tradition of ‘parliamentary sovereignty’. With judges unable to strike down Acts of Parliament for unconstitutionality, MPs have a key role in constitutional protection. Like MPs elsewhere, they also have responsibilities for upholding the constitution and democracy in many other ways, most obviously through holding the government to account, and representing the public, but also, for example, through maintaining standards of political debate. Meg Russell and Lisa James summarise these various important roles.
Members of parliament are central political actors in all democratic systems. Legislatures are highly visible institutions, and MPs have key roles representing citizens, debating key policy matters, scrutinising the executive and approving major changes to the law. The legislature is at the heart of any functioning national democracy.
Hence MPs routinely have important roles within the constitution. But some of their wider roles and responsibilities in upholding and protecting the constitution are less often spoken about. In an age of populism and ‘democratic backsliding’ these deserve reflection. As sadly seen in various countries, MPs are important gatekeepers whose consent can facilitate the dismantling of democratic norms and institutions. But where they stand firm, they can be bulwarks against decline.
Continue readingThe role of the media in democracies: what is it, and why does it matter?
This is the first edition of this briefing. It has since been updated. Read the most up-to-date version and other briefings on the Constitution Unit’s website.
The media plays a vital role in democracies, as an arena for debate and a source of accountability. But concerns have been raised about the health of the sector in the UK. Caitlin Farrell and Lisa James argue that safeguarding the media’s role requires action from both politicians and the media.
Background
In a democracy, the media educates, informs and entertains – including through news, opinion, analysis, satire and drama. It is a key route through which the public hears about politics, and it plays an important role in shaping the public agenda and forming public opinion.
However, in recent years frequent concerns have been expressed about the health of the news media. Attacks on media independence or broadcaster impartiality have raised alarm. Media market changes have led to cuts in local and investigative journalism and have amplified polarising rhetoric and misinformation. Monopoly ownership may yield an undue concentration of power.
Why does the media matter for democracy?
The media is central to democratic participation. It creates an arena for the exchange of opinion, discussion and deliberation – a space sometimes referred to as the ‘public sphere’. It provides a channel of communication between politicians and the public, allowing politicians to communicate their beliefs and proposals, giving the public the information that they need in order to participate, and allowing the voices of the public to be heard by politicians. The media also assists in holding politicians to account – through reporting, and direct scrutiny such as interviews.
The media has an important role in the formation of public opinion. Via the content and tone of its coverage, it can influence how members of the public understand an issue, which topics they consider important, and what information they use in forming overall political judgements.
Continue readingPublic appointments: what are they, and why do they matter?
This is the first edition of this briefing. It has since been updated. Read the most up-to-date version and other briefings on the Constitution Unit’s website.
Public appointments – senior appointments made by ministers to various public service roles – are vital to the working of government, but some have attracted controversy in recent years. Lisa James explains how public appointments work, and how they might be reformed.
Background
Public appointments – various senior appointments made by ministers to public bodies – can have a major impact on how well the public sector operates. Though the system often works smoothly, recent years have seen some high-profile controversies linked to public appointments, notably those surrounding Paul Dacre’s application to be chair of Ofcom, and the appointment of Richard Sharp as chair of the BBC. These and other cases have raised questions about whether the system now needs additional safeguards.
Why do public appointments matter?
These appointments include senior roles across a wide range of public bodies – including delivery or policy advisory bodies, regulators and funders, as well as departmental non-executive directors. They also include individual roles (for example, commissioners for victims, further education, or children).
The holders of public appointments can therefore have a major impact on the successful delivery of policy and services. A well-functioning public appointments process, which can engage and deliver the best candidates, matters for the quality of governance. This is demonstrated in countries where control over appointments has allowed backsliding leaders (i.e. those who seek to erode democracy) to install allies in key positions.
Given that the holders of public appointments are so important to the working of government, ministers understandably want to be confident that these posts are held by people who are in sympathy with their aims and approach. But it is important for public trust – and successful delivery – that appointments are also made on merit, and cronyism or patronage is guarded against.
Continue readingSeven questions about effective ways to fight democratic backsliding
The Constitution Unit held an event in May, at which three expert panellists discussed the rise of democratic backsliding internationally and considered key domestic and international interventions which might help to combat this trend. In this second blog detailing the event, Sophie Andrews-McCarroll summarises the questions put to the panel during the event and the answers that they gave.
The first blog on this event detailed the speaker presentations. This included a discussion of recent trends and developments in democracies internationally, definitions of key terms under consideration – and some examples of strategies which have been successful in countering ‘backsliding’ tendencies.
The below is a summary of some key points raised in the question and answer session.
1. What would an effective relationship between domestic actors and international actors in combatting democratic backsliding look like? What are the most effective international interventions? And how can domestic and international actors collaborate?
Seema Shah
International bodies require legitimacy at a domestic level, both among leaders and the population, in order to be effective. This legitimacy is often lacking.
Continue reading