10.12.2006
.
.
Analysing Various Democracies (Part 1)
_ by Dr. San Oo Aung
SPDC is declaring that they are aiming for the “Guided Democracy” or “Dispilined Democracy” but they even could not hide that the Myanmar Military’s promised “Democracy” is dominated by SPDC and Myanmar Military. Some of their Military Personnel may change their uniforms to disguise as non-military ordinary citizens.
But where is the true sense of real democracy when 25% of he seats are reserved for military, President must have 15 years of military experience and Defence Minister’s status is equal to the Deputy President. Myanmar military blatantly ignored the results of the fair election they held in 1990. And they are planning for the total and permanent dominance of the military in their so called “guided democracy” They even want to legalize the future military coups as their legitimate rights given by the people enshrined in the constitution.
Any government could just shamelessly claim that they are practising democracy. Even Communists are claiming that they practise democracy and Ne Win Military autocratic dictatorship of so called Burmese Way to Socialism also claimed they are democratic.
But we wonder what is the use or value of democracy when it needs consensus as in ASEAN. Nothing can be done or it is effectively paralysed to deal with Myanmar SPDC’s stubborn behaviours. Even United Nation’s General assembly became a toothless tiger in dealing with Myanmar and Israel. Few dozens of democratic voting and resolutions were fallen on deaf ears of Myanmar SPDC and Israel Governments. And even United Nations Security Council became a eunuch because of the castrating veto votes.
And what is so great with the democracy, if the most recent global trends in democratisation have been negative, signalling a pause in the spread of democracy. I do not know what to comment about the highly ranked democracy countries that go out and murder innocent civilians in defenceless countries and just camouflaged as collateral damage in the war on terror. President of Pakistan’s revealation of arm twisting method of a big super-power threatening to carpet-bombing if they fail to co-operate in the fight against terrorism. It is credible because the same ultimatum was given to the Taliban Government to deal with Al Qidar leaders. Because they refused, the whole country was bombed and taken over. I am not telling that the regime change in Afghanistan was wrong. But the Afghanistan and Pakistan governments’ over enthusiastic arresting of all the foreigners and “sold” to US Intelligence as Terrorists is not acceptable according to the democratic principles. And the ill treatment of those prisoners at Gutanamo Bay and Abugarib is also undemocratic or uncivilized.
Although 9/11 event and bombing of the tubes or underground trains tainted the people of the those democracies to re-elect their respective governments and those opposed were unfairly labelled as unpatriotic, nowadays we have witnessed the beautiful part of democracy in USA and UK. People voted out the Republicans and replaced with Democrats in the midterm election.
But President Bush never behave like the SLORC or SPDC Myanmar Tatmadaw Generals. Although his powerful position as the President is still intact, he accepted the people’s verdict without any question, fired his Defence Secretary and invited opposition leader for the dinner and pledged that he will fully co-operate with his enemy, Democrats. Prime Minister Mr Blair is also been sent a “recall” message by his own party using intra-party democracy. So he is also changing his foreign policy. This is the beauty of democracy in USA and UK which we all Burmese should learn and emulate.
In Fiji, people are threatened by the military coup, not to freely use their democratic rights. In an ASEAN country, people are regularly threatened by the ruling party with the racial riots if they failed to vote in again for them.
Prof. Kanbawza Win wrote in disappointment, “We must recollect the 28 UN Assembly resolution urging to release all political prisoners serving lengthy sentences including the Burmese Nobel Laureate was never met. The 29th resolution now deliberating will be no exception...”
And, of course, the definition of the word democracy is never perfect in this world anyway.The problems faced by us are not similar to problems in many other countries and therefore we need our own solutions to our problems.
1. But basic characteristics of democratic system must be instituted and followed.
2. There must be plurality.
3. We must allow multi-political parties even if based on different races and religions although there must be a strict rule for the government of the country to be secular and must be colour blind regarding ethnicity and religious matters
4. and must be be based on meritocracy.
5. And the most important thing is that there must be free elections.
6. There must be a clear separation of powers and responsibilities among the legislatures, judiciary and executive branch of government.
7. We must never allow any one, King, President, PM or Military Generals, monopoly rights to all three branches.
8. There must be a parliamentary system.
9. We must improvement these institutions by allowing a proper check and balance system.
10. But we must start the act of eradicating corruptions, we must be accountable in every deed and there must be transparency.
11. And the most important thing is to respect and recognize each and every persons’ rights, minority races, minority religions, workers, women, children and etc including handicapped persons.
12. And those minorities’ rights must be protected from the “bullies” of the majority.
13. So the most important part in the democracies is the “Good Governance”.
14. The free press and right to dissent by any citizens. The right to dissent in the party or even among the MPs and Cabinet members is essential for the healthy democracy
Abraham Lincoln defined democracy as_ “A government of the people, by the people and for the people."
The democracy index, analysed in The Economist's annual publication, The World
in 2007, grades 167 countries out of 192 independent states according to their
degree of democracy.
The index looks at 60 indicators across the five categories of:
1. electoral process and
2. pluralism,
3. civil liberties,
4. the functioning of government,
5. political participation, and
6. political culture.
Countries are spread across four regime types:
- full democracies (28 countries),
- flawed democracies (54),
- hybrid regimes (30) and
- authoritarian regimes (55).
Full democracy
Among the “Full democracies” Sweden is the top with a near-perfect score followed closely by Iceland and the Netherlands.
The United States of America just ranked 17th, Japan 20, Britain is 23rd and France 24th are near the bottom of the full democracy category, according to The Economist.
Flawed democracy
South Africa is the top in the "flawed democracy" category ranking 29th , followed by South Korea at 31, Taiwan 32, India 35, Mongolia 56, Sri Lanka 57, the Philippines 63, Indonesia 65, Timor Leste 65, Bangladesh 75, Hongkong 78 and Palestine 79. Malaysia ranks 81, sharing the spot with Bolivia, falls nearly at the bottom of the list, below Mongolia, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, Indonesia, Timor Leste and Palestine in a new Democracy Index developed by the Economist Intelligence Unit.
The statement said "flawed democracies" were concentrated in Latin America and eastern Europe.
"Many of these countries remain fragile democracies. Levels of political participation are generally very low and democratic cultures are weak," it said.
Hybrid regimes
Singapore (84), Thailand (90) and Cambodia (105) and Iraq (112).
Authoritarian regimes
Pakistan (113) tops the list of "authoritarian regimes" while North Korea ranks last. In between are China (138), Vietnam (145), Laos (155) and Myanmar (163).
The Economist said more than half of the world's population lived in a democracy of some sort, although only 13% reside in full democracies.
"Despite the advances in democracy in recent decades, almost 40% of the world's population still live under authoritarian rule," it said.
Democracy literally means "rule by the people".
(From Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia.)
Originally taken from the Greek demos, "people," and kratos, "rule".
Democracy is a form of government for a nation in which all the citizens have an equal vote or voice in shaping policy or electing government officials.
The principles of the Democracy are also applicable to other organizations, such as
1. universities,
2. labour unions,
3. public companies,
4. civic organizations or
5. civil societies.
Different forms of Democracy
As the concept of democracy is basically nice, beautiful, appealing to the public, many governments claimed or tried to associate their system of governments with democracy in order to fool the people and continue to rule the country.
So Political systems claiming to be democratic have ranged very broadly. For example:
Aristotle described the
1. rule by the many (democracy/polity), with
2. rule by the few (oligarchy/aristocracy), and with
3. rule by a single person (monarchy/tyranny or today autocracy).
Certain tribes organised themselves using forms of participatory democracy.
1. Democracy is used to describe systems seeking consensus (see Deliberative democracy).[9]
2. Many socialists claimed that socialism is a form of democracy (see Ne Win’s Socialist Democracy).
3. The soviet republic, a communist state, also claim that it is a form of democracy and representation. There were examples of Soviet Republics with multi-party system and even without a communist party. In classical Soviet Republic all power belongs to the hierarchy of Councils, with the Supreme Council on the top.
4. Many other communist states were organized following the above model. However, Communist states are widely seen as being de facto dictatorships by bourgeois criticisms, since the elections they held tended to be heavily rigged.
5. People's democracy was considered a form of democracy in (mostly developing) countries that decided to follow socialist way, but did not eliminated some capitalist issues yet.
Direct democracy
1. Direct democracy is a political system where the citizens vote on all major policy decisions.
2. It is called direct because, there are no intermediaries or representatives.
3. For example small civic organizations (like college faculties) and town meetings in New England (usually in towns under 10,000 population).
4. Critics note that it sometimes emphasises the act of voting more than other democratic procedures such as petition, or such as freedom of speech and press, or civic organisations.
5. All direct democracies to date have been relatively small communities; usually city-states. Today, a limited direct democracy exists in some Swiss cantons that practice it in its literal form.
6. Modern direct democracy tries to accommodate this problem and sees a role for strictly controlled representatives. It is characterised by three pillars; referendums (initiated by governments or legislatures or by citizens responding to legislation), initiatives (initiated by citizens) and recall elections (on holders of public office)
Representative democracy
Representative democracy is so named because the people select representatives to a governing body. Representatives may be chosen by the electorate as a whole (as in many proportional systems) or represent a particular district (or constituency), with some systems using a combination of the two. Some representative democracies also incorporate some elements of direct democracy, such as referenda. Representative democracy is susceptible to various problems such as Gerrymandering of constituencies.
To be continued...
Your Comments here_ please do not use symbols "(:/\<>!|{]@~#$)"
Request: If you can kindly volunteer to translate BURMA DIGEST English articles into Burmese, please let us know burmadigest@tayzathuria.org.uk .
.
Last week's English articles