Democracy is what many individuals yearn for and it has created more conflict between those who ask for it and those who with their own reasons deny others this opportunity. It can be defined as a government that is run by the people who live under it. Abraham Lincoln defined it as a government of the people, for the people and by the people. It is said that he also defined democracy as the capability of the people to govern themselves.
It involves engaging the people in the decision-making process of the nation. Of course, not the whole population of a state or nation can be included in the decision-making process. The populous therefore elects or appoints people who will represent them and address their views and issues at a national level (Archibunghu; 132). Democracy involves several features; universal suffrage is one of them.
Every individual is entitled to his/her vote as long as the person is eligible to vote. Regular elections are another feature. A state should conduct elections periodically to ensure that the people get to elect the people they desire. Free and fair elections are another key element of democracy. The elections conducted regularly should be in a free and fair manner without impartiality. In a democratic state, there is general freedom of expression and observation of other human rights.
Having defined what democracy is and looked at its elements briefly, it is important to look at case studies and examples of democracies in the world. This paper seeks to address this issue. The paper will look at two critical nations and compare them as far as democracy is concerned. Mali and the United States of America will be the main points of discussion. The paper will compare and contrast the similarities and differences in democracy in America and Mali.
This will be done by first looking at democracy in Mali and later in America. Later, the comparison will be done in the conclusion where an unbiased opinion will be given on which country is more democratic having looked at the features of democracy.
Democracy in Mali
The concepts of legal status, democracy, good governance, human rights as well as human safety have been the key issues of strategic development and policies for fifteen good years. Mali has witnessed a tough and long route in achieving the democracy it has today. It has experienced many years of war and ethnic violence. The conflict between the nomadic Tuaregs and the Malian army was just but one of them.
For a long time, the people of Mali have lived under the fear of attacks from neighboring communities and the lack of a stable government to address this predicament. This was Mali almost a decade ago. Today, Mali boasts of one of the most democratic states in Africa. The embracing of democracy in Mali was one of the ways of achieving a fifteen-year development strategic plan. Since 1992, Mali has been an independent, sovereign, indivisible, democratic, secular and social republic (Anderson; 342).
The most important word on the list is “democratic”. One factor has made enabled Mali to embrace and enforce democracy; the separation of power through the different arms of government has brought in some level of accountability and responsibility in the government. The different arms are the executive, the legislature and the judiciary.
The judicial arm of government in Mali is supported by their constitution. Under Article 85 of the Mali constitution, the judicial branch of government is independent of the other two arms of government i.e. the executive and the legislature. The main function of the judiciary in Mali is the protection and guard of human rights and freedoms. Amongst the elements of a democratic state is that where the nation advocates for and embraces the rights and freedoms of all the individuals in the nation. It works through the highest Court and other courts of the nation, as well as the board, and is in control of relating laws in the relevant field. The observance of the law by the people and the administration of justice by the judiciary in Mali have ensured that democracy is attained to some level.
The executive branch of government has also played a major role in the democratization of Mali. The political regime in Mali is based on a two-headed executive branch. This is where the dissolution of power is witnessed to a great extent. There is the president of the country, who is the head of the state, and the prime minister who is the head of government. Unlike other African nations and other nations in the world where the president is the head of state and government, Mali has adopted the two-headed system of governance. It is not up to the President alone to make all the calls that pertain to matters of the state and government neither is it up to the Prime Minister to do so.
One thing that is not clear is who therefore chairs the cabinet meetings as both the heads are in the cabinet. The Prime Minister is thus accountable to the state assembly and not to the President. Democracy as defined as a government-run by the people. The members of the national assembly are elected by the people of the republic. While the Prime Minister is accountable to the state assembly, it means that he is accountable to the citizens as the state assembly stands for the opinion of the citizens. Democracy is also depicted in this situation. Checks and balances are also accounted for since it is up to the people to decide.
The legislature in Mali has depicted the highest level of democracy in the country. This all begins in the election of the legislators serving in the National Assembly. At a state level, Mali votes for the leader of a state, who is the president, and the governing body. The president serves for five years before another election is held by the citizens of the country. The state Assembly has 160 affiliate members who are also voted for 5 years in a term.
The representation is what has impressed many historians and political scientists, 147 of the members are elected in single-seat constituencies while the remaining 13 are elected by the Malians in Diaspora. Two elements of democracy are brought out and depicted here; one is that of regular elections as the members are elected for a five-year term each and the other is the element of universal suffrage as even citizens abroad are allowed to vote.
Whether or not the elections are free and fair is up to the Malian authorities to report. No incidences have been reported since 1992 of rigged elections. Another feature of the Malian National Assembly that has put it on the list of democratic nations is in its composition. The Malian legislature is made up of the majority and the opposition. This implies that Mali has a multi-party system, with quite some parties. No one party has had the chance of gaining power alone, which is dangerous, but they have learned to work with each other under coalition governments hence the position of a Prime Minister. The multi-party system is another important aspect and feature of democracies.
The civil societies in Mali have had a great influence in promoting and consolidating democracy. Since the advent of multi-party politics in Mali, civil societies have played a great role in ensuring that human rights and freedoms are observed and respected (Anderson; 213). Was it not for these societies, multi-party democracy would not exist in the first place? Through the voice of the civil activists, democracy has been attained and Malians are enjoying the fruits of their labor.
Democracy in the USA
Tocqueville, a great historian and political scientist of the earlier times, termed democracy in the Americas as the most advanced form of democracy and he even looked at it as their strength. It is almost impossible to argue with this. However, democracy then is not the same kind of democracy experienced today. Tocqueville had actually seen this and showed some relentlessness and fear of democracy becoming a tyranny. According to Tocqueville, “extreme democracy forestalls the dangers of democracy” (Copp; 2).
He was of the view that with the freedom of the people of the Americas, majority rule could actually end up being majority tyranny. The framers of the US constitution agreed with this school of thought. They, therefore, opposed direct democracy and opted for representative democracy. The difference came in the governance.
Tocqueville distinguished between democracy in the sense of democratic political system, or a set of institutions through which rulers are held responsible to electoral majorities, and democracy in the sense of social system in which there is an absence “of legally maintained class hierarchies” (Rawls; 365). This was done solely for the reason or purpose of protecting the individual from the will of the majority. This is what creates the difference between democracy in the US and democracy in other parts of the world, specifically Mali.
Compared to the system in Mali, the US is more or less the same in as far as the offices put up to promulgate democracy are concerned i.e. the arms of government. Their roles are also almost similar. There is the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. All these arms are independent of each other and no decisions taken by each branch are influenced by another arm unless the circumstances force it to be so (Schumpeter; 312). The executive comprises the President and his Ministers some of whom are referred to as secretaries. They are charged with the responsibility of implementing government policies. Unlike Mali, the position of the Prime Minister is non-existent in the US.
This can be looked at in two ways with regards to democracy; one of them is that the democratic levels in the US are low because there is no form of accountability and dissolution of power. The president is the head of state and head of government, the decisions he makes will be final and he can choose not to consult others in the decision-making process. Another way of looking at it is that it portrays high levels of democracy in the US. The main reason why an office of the Prime Minister is created in many countries, and this includes Mali, is because of some cases of irregularities in the elections. There being no clear winner, a coalition government is formed where the supreme power has to be shared. The office of the Prime Minister is therefore created to address this issue (Douglas; page 153).
The legislature is made up of the legislators who are elected by the people and the President. Each serves a four-year term. The house is also made up of the majority who form the government and the minority who form the opposition. According to the elements of a democracy, the US automatically qualifies as a democratic state as a result of this. Regular elections and the presence of multi-party democracy confirm that the US upholds democracy. The legislators represent the people and this brings out the element of universal suffrage.
The judiciary also plays a vital role in as far as democracy is concerned in the US. The Supreme Court is the highest upholds the law and ensures that all citizens abide by it. It also protects the human rights and the freedoms of individuals. Without the judicial system in the US, which is credited as one of the most transparent and effective in the world, democracy in the country would crumble. The independence of the judiciary is the most important feature of any democracy as it is the judiciary that ensures the democracy of its citizens. The judicial system in the US is independent of the other arms of government and it does its work effectively.
The civil societies in the US indeed played a major role in advocating for democracy. Since the early years when the US was still fighting some forms of discrimination, civil societies were there to help curb the situation. They helped bring about the idea of change and freedom for all. Today, the work of civil societies is being seen in the US when it comes to the issue of democracy. The framers of the constitution had the best interest of the nation when they framed the constitution.
However, some issues are not clearly spelled out as far as democracy is concerned. The implementation of direct democracy and representative democracy has its flaws. This is where civil societies have come into place in assisting the US as a nation. They have pushed for amendments in certain parts of the constitution that are not clearly spelled out. This has meant that they have had to revisit the constitution and find a mechanism of aligning the works of the framers with the status quo. Other areas where democracy is not being observed especially instances involving human rights have also and are being addressed by the civil societies in the US. Efforts, however, to make the US are fully democratic state are also proving to go in vain as this is a very difficult task. Some people hold different positions in various issues that involve democracy and would not want to go against their beliefs.
Conclusion
The two nations discussed above, Mali and the US, have made several strides in their fight for the advocacy of democracy. They have come from far and have actually persevered a lot towards achieving and practicing it. The difference is in the implementation and possibly the choice of words used. As far as the US is concerned, its practices are aligned to those of Mali when it comes to the elements of democracy. Mali has come from far in implementing and upholding the democracy of their country.
Universal suffrage is observed by both countries, the regular elections are held in both countries, free and fair elections are also evident, protection of human rights and finally multi-party democracy. All these elements are observed by both countries. The difference comes in the “wording”. Whereas the US chooses to call it a representative democracy, Mali calls it direct democracy.
In my view, the features are the same and therefore the differences are slight. An example is that Mali is mainly comprised of the Muslim population. In some instances, they would apply some Sharia laws which many may consider as undemocratic. The stoning to death of an adulterous wife or husband is provided for in Sharia law. This is against the human right to life. Some people in the country practice it. Man would consider this as being undemocratic.
The question, therefore, is what should be done in this case? The Muslim population in the country has practiced Sharia laws for centuries. Besides they are entitled to the freedom of worship which is another human right. Another example is that of abortion which is legal in man states in the US. There is the question of the right of the mother and her choice, but what about the right of the child which is the right to life. By going against these rights are these people undemocratic? This is what is referred to as “Democracy and Preferences”. In this situation, we have public choice versus democracy and social choice versus democracy.
Russell Hardin and Thomas Christiano in the idea of democracy argue that “Even though every individual may have a clear preference ranking of all alternatives before him, the society may not be able to convert these individual rankings into a collective ranking”. They further argued that individual motives for action may not fit collective preferences for outcomes even when the latter are well defined.
My take is that just as the definition defines democracy as a government of the people, for the people, and by the people; we should not complicate the issue by bringing in other factors. In as far as governance and people representation is concerned, both countries are democratic.
Work cited
Anderson, L. Transitions to Democracy. (ed). New York: Cambridge University Press. 1999.
Archibughu ,D. Re-Imagining Political Community: Studies in Cosmopolitan Democracy. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 1998.
Copp,D. The Idea of Democracy: Could Political Truth be a Hazard for Democracy. 2nd edition. New York. Cambridge University Press.
Douglas W. Promoting Democracy: Opportunities and Issues. New York: Praeger. 1988.
Hardin, R. Does Might Make Right? Authority revisited. Oxford. Basil Blackwell. 1989.
Schumpeter, J. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York: Harper Torchbooks. 1947.