Democracies: A Case of Protecting Rights



Democracies: A Case of Protecting Rights

Introduction

Democracy is a well-thought process which preserves the rights of people as per the constitution. The ideology revolves around maintaining the power in the hands of people rather than an individual. On the other hand, authoritarianism is often said to be an organized form of tyranny or despotism. In theory, the two terms possesses a great deal of contrast in the nature of its governance. However, a democratic process is interrupted by perceived goodness of authoritarian measures.

The democratic well-wishers articulate an open and fair commentary on the implications of authoritarian measures under the banner of so called democratic evolution. The contradiction becomes even more apparent when it comes to ubiquitous claim for people-empowerment. It is often observed that democratic principles are violated with perceived threats to national security. In such cases, the democratic principles fail to entail the occurrence of authoritarian decisions. In this regard, it is essential to analyze whether authoritarian methods are morally compatible with the democratic practices or not. Further, there is a need to explore the situations demanding authoritarian methods. The essay presents a discussion over the research matter and presents a brief conclusion.

Discussion

Authoritarian Method & Democratic Principles

In the tug of war between democracy & authoritarianism, nearly everyone favors the principles of democratic ruling. However, we see a democratic government implements authoritarian method in one or the other way. It is due to the nature of government that they tend to surpass the public opinion. The moral compatibility of democratic methods must be weighed against the democratic principles. For that matter, it becomes essential to analyze the democratic elements in state settings. Democratic ideology cultivates liberty & civil rights among the people of a nation. Under democratic rulings, the constitution safeguards the civil rights. According to it, an individual has a fair right to exercise the freedom of speech. They have the right to live in peace & privacy. In democratic model of state authority, the constitution and rule of law are above all the security institutions (Martin, 2011). In such a setting, the government exercises constrained authorities, limited by the constitution. The most distinguishing feature is that nobody gets arrested without a legal process.

In the late 20th century, it was difficult to classify between a democratic or authoritarian regime. According to Ottaway, “they are ambiguous systems that combine rhetorical acceptance to liberal democracy, the existence of some formal democratic institution and respect for a limited sphere of political and civil liberties with essentially ill-liberal or even authoritarian traits” (2003, p.3). The rise of semi-authoritarian state projects the biggest challenge to the principles of democracy.

Authoritarian methods allow dictatorship decisions, which abolish the moral groundings as per the democracy doctrine. The security institutions have the central role, so they disregard the civilian rights for larger benefits. Authoritarian practices disregard the legal processes required for surveillance, inspection or detain suspects. A security official can search through a private premise without having to produce the minimum ...