Forms and Criticisms of Democracy: Representative and Direct

Extract

[...] The great national debate announced by the head of state attests to the inadequacies of the classical channels of representative democracy in responding to popular aspirations in a timely manner. Some even speak of the unfinished nature of democracy, which struggles to find its way in the face of "the progression of economic globalization, the acceleration of European construction, the growth of the role of law, the rise of non-elected regulatory bodies, and the active role of the Constitutional Council"3. These observations raise the question of whether democracy is still capable of achieving its objectives. [...]

[...] The mode of democratic functioning In democratic regimes, election is the natural mode of electing rulers. In France, the right to vote is universal and equal in accordance with paragraph 3 of article 3 of the constitution which states that 'the vote can be direct or indirect in the conditions provided for by the Constitution. It is always universal, equal and secret'. It is universal, because it is no longer based on wealth or sex. It is equal, because each citizen has a single vote and cannot, as before, claim multiple votes attached to a certain number of qualities they hold. [...]

[...] These previous applications have raised concerns about its results. It is enough to recall the use that Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte made of it in 1852 to restore the Empire. The rehabilitation of the referendum under General De Gaulle in 1958 aimed to provide a 'correction of the ultra-representative trends of the parliamentary regime'8.This regime has indeed been the main source of recurrent government instability under the III and IV Republics. The inscription of the referendum occurred in general terms in article 3 of the 1958 Constitution, then in a more specific manner in articles 11 and 89 of the same document. [...]

[...] Does democracy still fulfill its objectives today? Democracy, according to Abraham Lincoln, is 'the government of the people, by the people, and for the people.' This mode of government is therefore closely linked to 'the sovereignty of the people, which is expressed through their vote and the choice of their representatives.'1. A democratic regime cannot do without the rule of law, in the sense that the actions of the rulers must derive their legitimacy from pre-established rules whose violation could be sanctioned. [...]

[...] However, even consecrated and protected, this freedom does not allow, as Benjamin Constant has noted, to immunize oneself against the tyranny of the majority, considering that 'the more time and forces a man devoted to the exercise of his political rights, the more he thought himself free'. Democracy also implies the right to equality. This right implies equality for all before the law. The latter must not introduce discrimination or differences between individuals. From this principle of legal equality, the following rights follow, which cannot be dissociated from any democratic enterprise. It is about 'equality before the law, before justice, equal access to public employment, before public charges, equal suffrage, equality between man and woman'.10. [...]