Unelected Bodies Of Government

INTRODUCTION
The unelected bodies are contemplated to be institutions that are not states. They are organizations such as the independent banks, economic regulators, risk managers and auditors. They have grown to exist worldwide and are seen to participate in many areas that only states had dominance on. They are thought to be a challenge on the democracy of states but are also trusted by the citizens of these states because they make many decisions and policies that involve the citizens. The states to some extent trust them to make assured decisions like in conflict resolutions, allocation of resources and also formation of boundaries between the states and the markets. This shows that they hold an upper hand in making certain specific decision …show more content…
The citizens may see the world of the unelected as being better than the state’s role because they perform better and can be trusted unlike the elected. The unelected enable the elected function well in their day to day work. Societies are seen to operate with the unelected better than the elected and the democracies seem to want to cover up the work of the unelected. This is seen as a major challenge because of the separation of powers and the elected are seen to be reluctant in fulfilling their roles to the citizens. The unelected are the new elites in the society and are seen to also have struggles with the democratic forms of governments. They are assumed to make the work of democracies seem less important to the society and also bring out the misuse of the rule of law by democracies. These highlights the pull and push within these two bodies yet in real sense they are supposed to work together.
Democratic theory stresses the values of liberty, equality and justice in any system of authority. It promotes the rule of majority while protecting the minority rights and maintaining willingness to compromise. It recognizes everyone’s worth and dignity. This has enabled and guided the …show more content…
The main focus is usually on the extent to which people belong to a particular state are allowed in decision making. Repressive forms of government do not constitute development. A typical example of political development is characterized by democracy and its fundamental characteristics yet in real sense this democracy is suppressed by the elected. The elected use the state as a means of carrying out their interests and not the interests of the citizens and this creates a gap between the society and the elected. With this gap, the society then sees the unelected fit to carry out the functions of a state and trust the unelected causing conflict between the unelected and the elected. Since the state is controlled by a few, they then dismiss the interests or concerns of the citizens and hence problems that cause the citizens to trust the unelected better. With this shift, the unelected become superior to the state and later the state complains of short changing. Vibert has tackled these issues very well and has reflected what the reality of the society is. He has clearly brought out the problems and focused on them very well and concluded that the only way the elected and the unelected can work together is by the separation of powers and the having the checks for the elected so that they do not suppress the needs and interests of the