3 hours ago
12
DEMOCRACY is a term that has become increasingly popular in global politics. However, in recent times, many authors have expressed fears on the future of democracy. Likewise, many citizens have shown considerable dissatisfaction with how democracy is operated. Regardless, the world has become more democratic in the last 2 centuries. By the end of 2023, only 18.99 percent of the countries on the world have no form of democracy in their appointments to public offices. By implication, 81.01 percent of countries in the world practice full or partial democracy. 97 countries practice full democracy and more than half the entire global population live in countries that practice one f form of democracy or the other. Consequently, any discussion on democracy and leadership is one that affects more than half of the global population. Indeed, we live in a democratic world.
Historical development of democracy
The word democracy was derived from Greek word demokratia which literary translates to mean ‘rule by the people’. Democracy is a political system where the citizens have a share of power. The modern-day practice is to give the people the power to elect public officers and to hold them accountable for the tenure in office. Democracy in not a new concept. Rather, it owes its history to practices in the Classical Antiquity periods during the times of the ancient Greeks and ancient Roman Republics.
The Ancient Greeks practiced a form of representative democracy. PERICLE, one of Athenians’ most distinguished democratic leaders, described the Athenian system of rule thus: “Its administration favors the many instead of the few; this is why it is called a democracy. If we look to the laws, they afford equal justice to all in their private differences; if no social standing, advancement in public life falls to reputation for capacity, class considerations not being allowed to interfere with merit; nor again does poverty bar the way, if a man is able to serve the state, he is not hindered by the obscurity of his condition. The freedom which we enjoy in our government extends also to our ordinary life.”
No Athenian could be selected for an office more than once. This ensured that no one could build up a power base by staying in a particular position for an elongated period of time. In addition to this, Athens had what is called the Assembly. It is a massive democratic body in which every male citizen had a say. This is where all government legislations and policies were put to vote. Voting was done by show of hands and counted by the nine presidents which are selected randomly from those present just before the meeting started. This system was meant to make it impossible to bribe the nine presidents.
Read Also: Trump’s cabinet picks, appointees face bomb threat, swatting incidents
It is obvious from the above that the Athenians placed premium on fairness and abhorred all forms of malpractices leading up to the election of representatives.
In addition, where a public figure was disgraced or simply became too popular for the good of democracy, their names will be written on shards of pottery during the elections for ostracism or exile. The person whose name was mentioned the most will be exiled from Athens for 10 years. The practice of Democracy in Greece later influenced governance in Rome. Initially, the Romans practiced a more unique form of government which is a form of democracy. Rome was ruled by a king elected by the Assemblies from the ruling families. This system was abandoned in 510 BCE because of external influences and internal strife. In 454 BCE, the Senate sent three persons to Greece to study the Greek laws as a model for Rome. Part of the ideals that were gotten from Greece was their democratic process.
Voting in Rome started off after the Athenian model where votes were by show of hands publicly. However, in 139 BC, the secret ballot system commenced in Rome because wealthy sponsors were influencing votes. Since the time of the Romans and their conquest of the known world, democracy was extended to many European countries. For example, the kingdom of Poland and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth had a practice of electing the King.Britain also enacted the Bill of Rights in 1689 which introduced free elections, stated the requirements for election, and limited the power of the Monarchs so that royal absolutism would not prevail.
Eligibility for election in public offices
The ideals of fairness and integrity in democracy was sustained over the years and has been incorporated into the conditions for eligibility for elections in many countries today.
- Election in Nigeria: sections 131, 137 and 142 of the Nigerian Constitution states that for a candidate to qualify for election into political offices, he/she:- a. must have no death sentence or imprisonment or fine for offences involving dishonesty or fraud, b. must not be convicted within the period of 10 years for offences involving dishonesty c. must not have been found guilty of contravention of the code of conduct. d. must have evidence of tax payment for three (3) years immediately preceding the year of election
All these points to the character of such candidate. 2. Elections in England: the standards are not that different in England. In order to qualify for election, the candidate must meet certain standards. Any candidate who: a. has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment of three months or more (including a suspended sentence) during 5 years before the poll day, or b. has been disqualified under the Representation of the People Act 1983 due to illegal or corrupt practice, or c. has been accused of sexual offences under the Sexual Offences Act of 1972, or d. is convicted for a criminal offence motivated by hostility towards a candidate(s), or e. has been convicted of electoral fraud, cannot become a Member of Parliament. 3. Elections in Afghanistan: Article 62 of the Constitution of Afghanistan of 2004 states that a candidate for the office of President must not have been convicted of crimes against humanity, a criminal act or deprived of civil rights by court
- Elections in Australia: A person is incapable of being a member of the House of Representatives under section 44 of the Australian constitution if such person: a. has been convicted and is under sentence or subject to be sentenced for an offence punishable by imprisonment for one year or longer under a State or Commonwealth law; b. takes the benefit, whether by assignment, composition, or otherwise, of any law relating to bankrupt or insolvent debtors; or c. directly or indirectly takes or agrees to take any fee or honorarium for services rendered to the Commonwealth, or for services rendered in the Parliament to any person or State d. has been imprisoned for an offence for 12 months or more e. has been punished on the grounds of betrayal, bribery, or excessive interference with political liberty provisions similar to reputation of the candidates are contained in
- Article 100 of the Constitution of Azerbaijan 6. Article 48, section 4 and Article 66 of the Constitution of Bangladesh 7. French Electoral code (Code électoral) 8. Law No. 7 of 2017 of Indonesia 9. Article 76, of the Constitution of Turkey It is important to note that the constitution of many countries are silent on this requirement reflecting on the integrity of the candidates. Examples of countries in this category are Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Brazil, Colombia, People’s Republic of China, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Iceland, India, Mexico, Maldives, North Macedonia, Pakistan, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Republic of Korea, Taiwan and the United States of America.
Conclusion
Political offices are symbols of prestige, power, influence, high repute and an expression of the will and choice of the people of a democratic nation. Candidates do not inherit the offices. Rather, they are chosen because the electorate deem them fit and qualified.It is my view that the public office holders should show exemplary character and they should be persons of integrity.
Governments are run by humans, not angels. Every political office is only as important as its occupants. Hence there ought to be standards for people who will qualify to occupy these offices.
According to Dwight D. Eisenhower said: ‘The supreme quality of leadership is integrity.’
AARE AFE BABALOLA, OFR, CON, SAN, LL.D (Lond.)
