Definition of democracy

¶ … conditions in Somaliland fit Schmitter and Karl's (S&K) definition of a democracy? Which ones do not?

Democracies are not of the same type or quality. Some democracies tend to score better on democratic scales, Freedom House for example, as compared to others. This essay looks at the case study of Somaliland in reference to procedural minimum requirements of a democracy identified in the S&K thesis. These are as follows.

a) Values vs. institutions

Schmitter and Karl's (1991) definition of democracy highlights an important fact i.e., there is no single institutional arrangement to attain such a political structure. Thus, according to the S&K thesis, it is not the existence of certain types of institutions per say but values that determine whether a country is democratic. These values roughly include accountability of elected representatives to the public, right of participation in political offices for the common man, free flow of information and the right of constructive criticism of the state and its machinery.

Somaliland is a perfect example of this distinction that the S&K thesis highlights. Its institutions are founded on traditional societal values rather than replicating western styled democracies. However, they have been able to attain the above mentioned values of a democracy. The council of elders a kind of upper house in the Somaliland government is founded on the tradition of placing important decisions in the hands of clan elders. Yet at the same time it gives voice to all clans, whether influential or not, making it a representative system by giving political say to the minorities as well. Thus, Schmitter and Karl's distinction allows countries like Somaliland to be recognized in the league of democratic states despite their unconventional institutional arrangements.

b) Frequent and fairly conducted elections with all adults having the right to vote and contest

Another minimum procedural requirement in a democracy is that there is a consistent shuffling of the government to hold the elected representatives accountable to the people. Voting in a democracy is the way that citizens judge and reward or punish their representatives. The threat of losing elections ensures that the public officials try to achieve their mandate within the time allotted to them thus performing their task relatively better than other forms of government. Studies have shown for example that democratic governments tend to serve the interests of the majority in the long run as compared to autocratic governments in order to consolidate their rule. Thus, elections are of immense importance for the functioning of a democracy.

Somaliland has been able to meet this condition as well. Its National Electoral Commission is one of the most competent government institutions in the country and has conducted three fair elections in less than five years. Apart from the regularity in elections, the screening process for nominated candidates has been formed after an open dialogue with the public and is easily understood in all circles so that the public can hold the EC accountable, if it allows candidates that do not meet the established criteria. These conditions also allow the common man to contest for elections if he meets the criteria. Thus, Somaliland has done much better as compared to other democracies in the developing world where the political reign remains in the hands of a few families, keeping common man out of the affair of the state.

However, despite the regularity and transparency of elections, Somaliland does not meet the condition of providing all adults equal opportunity to vote and contest for elections. This is partly because of the institutions that have emerged and partly because of the socio-economic condition of the region. For example, women participation is woefully low within the legislature and as voters as well. As state institutions have been formed on the basis of traditional values and through popular discourse amongst the men of the clans, little attempt has been made to mold them for achieving higher goals such as women empowerment. Traditionally women in Somaliland do not take part in economic or political life, thus the institutions that exist mirror this custom. Similarly, despite a constitution that guarantees the right of all individuals to contest for public office the reality is different. People affiliated with stronger clans, have greater opportunities and access to resources for self-development while others do not. Thus, despite having the right to contest majority of the population is illiterate and thus unable and unwilling to participate in the electoral process. In this scenario Somaliland is like any other developing country where rights are guaranteed but the common man is unable to exercise them as he does not have the socio-economic advantage that the rich minority does. It is no surprise thus, that in the Presidential election of 2010 there was a very low voter turn and there are only a few faces seen on the political scene.

c) Right to information from varied sources and freedom of Speech

One of the most difficult balances to obtain in any country is that between individual and group rights. Often developing countries, with newly formed institutions compromise on individual freedom on the basis of national security or defense. This situation is rampant even in countries that guarantee freedom of speech. Somaliland is no different. Its constitution allows people the right to criticize the government and to openly express their opinion through different platforms. The country even has a relatively free media. However, there have been certain incidences where the government has curbed these freedoms by punishing individuals making people awry of exercising this right. For example, a weekly magazine that discussed the idea of reunification with Somalia was banned under government orders. A CEO and 2x journalists of a newspaper were jailed after running stories on presidential corruption. Thus, Somaliland does meet the condition of having various platforms for information for the public but at times their freedom of speech has been curbed by the government.

d) Policy making depends on votes and other expressions of preferences

Somaliland has done pretty well as compared to other developing countries on this particular conditionality. Its Constitution was formed after careful deliberation in clan meetings attended by academics, clan elders, business groups and common people (Kaplan, 2008). Later on it was ratified through a public plebiscite again engaging the public in the policy making of the country. However, there have been times when this has not been the case. For example, national security has been used as a pretext to pass unpopular decisions such as the extension of the incumbent governments rule by 1 year that delayed the presidential elections till 2010. Many times majority demands have been sacrificed in lieu of a bigger aim of pacifying minority clans to maintain law and order.