Political Accountability in Liberal Democracies: A Critical Appraisal

Introduction to Liberal Democracy and Accountability

A liberal democracy is defined as a political philosophy by which people have inalienable rights to power and a free electoral process in their country. In other words, a liberal democracy is a political system characterized by free elections, political decisions made by an independent legislature, a multiparty political system, and an independent judiciary. In a liberal democratic system, people have the right to voice their opinions in the decision-making process of their country through the application of a majority rule, and to vote for the candidate they wish to hold political office. A liberal democracy is, in essence, a democracy of the people and for the people.

Typically, liberal democracy gives citizens the overall means to improve the political economy of their country through better government. Under a liberal democratic rule, people have the right to vote and participate in civic engagement to protect their rights. By actively participating in government activities, people are able to protect themselves from ruling elites. Moreover, people can participate in removing an elected president through a vote of no confidence requiring a two-thirds majority in both the House of Legislature and the Senate. By participating in political activism, people are able to protect their civic rights from a corrupt government (Mulgan, 2003).

The concept of accountability is synonymous with democracy. In a democratic system, political leaders can be held accountable for misdeeds carried out while in office (Schmitter, 2007). Political accountability refers to the way political parties, citizens, parliaments, and other political actors provide rewards, feedback, or sanctions to officials enacting public policy. A well-functioning accountability system is able to provide incentives for government to act in the interest of all citizens.

The objective of this paper is to provide a critical appraisal of the literature on accountability in a liberal democratic system in developing countries.

Horizontal Accountability and Separation of Powers

In modern democratic governance, actors in the public domain are responsible for making decisions regarding the common good, and the methods by which they are held accountable for their conduct are of central importance (Peter & Authur, 2012). Borowiak (2011) argues that accountability is an instrument for controlling governing authorities, and that the effectiveness of liberal democracy depends on meaningful accountability. Cheung and Leung (2007) explore the strategy that China employs to legitimize governmental rule through governmental accountability. The authors define accountability as the method by which the government serves the people's interest through democracy, the absence of corruption, and integrity. In essence, accountability is a basic feature of democracy in China, which assists in boosting the economy. More importantly, political accountability strengthens the rule of law and aims to safeguard people's interests.

O'Donnell (1998) argues that horizontal accountability is critical for the smooth running of a democracy. Horizontal accountability is defined as the existence of state agencies that are factually willing, legally empowered, and enabled to take actions such as impeachments or criminal sanctions against state political actors (Chen & Hsu, 2014). Typically, state agencies bear primary responsibility for horizontal accountability. Non-state actors such as party secretariats, media organizations, business associations, trade union confederations, large capital firms, and mass social movements are also capable of exercising horizontal accountability.

In a liberal democratic country, political parties play a critical role in enhancing or subverting horizontal accountability. In a presidential system of government, the most important aspect of horizontal accountability is the separation of powers and checks and balances. Nigeria is one example of a developing country that practices horizontal accountability through a presidential system of government. The separation of powers and checks and balances are clearly entrenched in the Nigerian constitution: the executive is separated from the legislature, and both the executive and legislature are separated from the judiciary. The principle of checks and balances means that each branch of government limits the power of the other branches. For example, Congress can remove the president through impeachment, while the judiciary can declare executive or legislative actions unconstitutional (Samarasinghe, 1994). Moreover, the executive president can veto laws passed by Congress.

Challenges to Horizontal Accountability in Developing Countries

Despite the benefits of horizontal accountability for the effective implementation of liberal democracy, this principle is lacking in many developing countries that nominally practice liberal democracy. Free and fair elections are essential features of vertical accountability. While some developing countries hold elections regularly, many have intermittent or weak horizontal accountability. O'Donnell (1998) points out that many Latin American countries have recently become politically democratic in a formal sense; however, countries such as Uruguay, Costa Rica, Colombia, Venezuela, and Chile lack robust horizontal accountability. Furthermore, freedom of speech and a free press—which permit citizens to voice their social demands—remain weak in many developing countries. The weakness of horizontal accountability in these contexts corresponds to a broader weakness of liberal democracy itself.

Conclusion

This paper carries out a critical appraisal of the literature exploring political accountability in a liberal democratic system. Since the 1990s, many developing countries have implemented multiparty democratic systems to enhance the accountability of political stakeholders. Similar to the developed countries that have entrenched the principle of accountability in their democratic systems, many developing countries have begun adopting multiparty systems to enhance the accountability of political actors. More importantly, the application of the rule of law, free elections, and a free press are effective tools that developing countries employ to enhance political accountability. The effective application of the principles of separation of powers and checks and balances will enable developing countries to achieve both political and economic development.

References

Borowiak, C. T. (2011). Accountability and Democracy: The Pitfalls and Promise of Popular Control. Oxford University Press.

Chen, W., & Hsu, J. C. (2014). Horizontal accountability in a polarised new democracy: The case of post-democratisation Taiwan. Australian Journal of Asian Law, 15(2), 1–19.

Cheung, C., & Leung, K. (2007). Enhancing life satisfaction by government accountability in China. Social Indicators Research, 82(3), 411–432.

Kellman, A. (2004). Democracy assistance in practice: The designing of a political party training program in the Republic of Kenya (MA thesis). Johannesburg, South Africa.

Matlosa, K. (2007). Political parties in Southern Africa: The state of parties and their role in democratization. International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.

Mulgan, R. (2003). Holding power to account: Accountability in modern democracies. Palgrave.

O'Donnell, G. A. (1998). Horizontal accountability in new democracies. Journal of Democracy, 9(3), 112–126.

OECD. (2014). Taking a systems approach to accountability in developing countries. In Accountability and democratic governance: Orientations and principles for development. OECD Publishing.

Peter, H., & Authur, E. (2012). The accountability of power: Democracy and governance in modern times. European Political Science Review, 4(2), 177–194.

Samarasinghe, S. A. (1994). Democracy and democratization in developing countries. Data for Decision Making Project, Department of Population and International Health, Harvard School of Public Health.

Schmitter, P. C. (2007). Political accountability in 'real-existing' democracies: Meaning and mechanisms. European University Institute.

Speijcken, R. (2011). Strengthening the roles of political parties in public accountability: A case study of a new approach in political party assistance in Kenya. International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.