2. The interlinkage between democracy and human rights
The internationalization of democracy and human rights since World War II is an achievement of great proportions and significance. However, while human rights are regularly seen as universally applicable, not all see the rights-based democracy as the most appropriate form of government for all peoples (LANGLOIS A. J., 2003, p. 990). Some observers have suggested that one way to promote an international human rights regime, while pre-empting the charge of cultural relativism or avoiding the notion of a “clash of civilizations,” is to separate respect for human rights from the Western-centric notion of democratization and treat such respect as the international norm (MONSHIPOURI M., & WELCH, …show more content…
Democracy is only secure if the conditions for the exercise of the popular will are guaranteed on an ongoing basis, through a protected set of basic freedom rights. In addition, democracy cannot be equated with any particular measure of an elected government (BEETHAM, D., op. cit.). As Davis Beetham put it, if people are to have any influence or control over public decision making and decision makers, they have to be free to communicate and associate with each other, to receive accurate information and express divergent opinions, to enjoy freedom of movement and to be free from arbitrary arrest and imprisonment (BEETHAM, D., op. cit. ). Moreover, when democratic decision-making and human rights are considered from the perspective of multiplicity of cultures, we will see that they require rights for minority groups, although these can be understood as based on a set of cultural human rights rather than intrinsically group-based rights (GOUD, C.C., 2004, p. …show more content…
As noted by Hewison Kevin, the notion of free political opposition and its assumptions about legitimate succession of government, is central to the democratic process, and its legal or constitutional institutionalization is taken as a key distinguishing feature of democratic politics (LAWSON, S., op. cit., p. 10). In practice, this kind of “consensus” is achieved mainly between the head of government and his/her ruling elites, the ordinary citizens being rarely consulted. The powers of the three branches of government which normally should separate in democratic states, are concentrated in one ruling party (or one person). This undermines and contradicts the very fundamental principles of democracy. In addition, most of African leaders who claim their governments to be democratic use this “democratic consensus” to justify their reluctance to surrender power by insisting that it is the will of their people, and that the issue is not the number of terms, but what the leader remaining on power has done or is doing during those terms (See GUMEDE, W., 2015; CLOETE, F, et al., 2003; FRANCK, T.M, 1992; DOLO, E., 2006; TESHOME, W., 2009; OBENG, K. W., 2011; BOYNE, G.A, et al., 2008; HOEANE, T., 2004). Thus, if this version is upheld, it would have as consequence to allow some African leaders to confront democracy by arguing that the values that democracy represents do not fit to their
The internationalization of democracy and human rights since World War II is an achievement of great proportions and significance. However, while human rights are regularly seen as universally applicable, not all see the rights-based democracy as the most appropriate form of government for all peoples (LANGLOIS A. J., 2003, p. 990). Some observers have suggested that one way to promote an international human rights regime, while pre-empting the charge of cultural relativism or avoiding the notion of a “clash of civilizations,” is to separate respect for human rights from the Western-centric notion of democratization and treat such respect as the international norm (MONSHIPOURI M., & WELCH, …show more content…
Democracy is only secure if the conditions for the exercise of the popular will are guaranteed on an ongoing basis, through a protected set of basic freedom rights. In addition, democracy cannot be equated with any particular measure of an elected government (BEETHAM, D., op. cit.). As Davis Beetham put it, if people are to have any influence or control over public decision making and decision makers, they have to be free to communicate and associate with each other, to receive accurate information and express divergent opinions, to enjoy freedom of movement and to be free from arbitrary arrest and imprisonment (BEETHAM, D., op. cit. ). Moreover, when democratic decision-making and human rights are considered from the perspective of multiplicity of cultures, we will see that they require rights for minority groups, although these can be understood as based on a set of cultural human rights rather than intrinsically group-based rights (GOUD, C.C., 2004, p. …show more content…
As noted by Hewison Kevin, the notion of free political opposition and its assumptions about legitimate succession of government, is central to the democratic process, and its legal or constitutional institutionalization is taken as a key distinguishing feature of democratic politics (LAWSON, S., op. cit., p. 10). In practice, this kind of “consensus” is achieved mainly between the head of government and his/her ruling elites, the ordinary citizens being rarely consulted. The powers of the three branches of government which normally should separate in democratic states, are concentrated in one ruling party (or one person). This undermines and contradicts the very fundamental principles of democracy. In addition, most of African leaders who claim their governments to be democratic use this “democratic consensus” to justify their reluctance to surrender power by insisting that it is the will of their people, and that the issue is not the number of terms, but what the leader remaining on power has done or is doing during those terms (See GUMEDE, W., 2015; CLOETE, F, et al., 2003; FRANCK, T.M, 1992; DOLO, E., 2006; TESHOME, W., 2009; OBENG, K. W., 2011; BOYNE, G.A, et al., 2008; HOEANE, T., 2004). Thus, if this version is upheld, it would have as consequence to allow some African leaders to confront democracy by arguing that the values that democracy represents do not fit to their