Seminar on International Democracy at the Scottish Parliament
On the Occasion of ‘The Democracy Day’
Objectives of the Seminar
The United Nations has declared 15 September as ‘International Democracy Day’. The United Nations Association of Edinburgh marked this day by holding a seminar at the Scottish Parliament 7:30-9:00 pm on 14 September 2009.
Angela Constance MSP, who had sponsored the seminar, gave the opening remarks, introducing Dr. Gari Donn, as the Convener of the UNA-Edinburgh. Then Dr. Donn introduced Prof. Dabir Tehrani as the speaker and chaired the meeting.
Following is a paper describing the talk, which was followed by a discussion period.
Dabir first thanked the audience for attending the seminar and thanked Angela Constance MSP-SNP not only for sponsoring the project but also for submitting the following motion to the Scottish Parliament:
Motion in support of International Democracy Day
Date of Lodging: 14 September 2009
Short Title: International Democracy Day
S3M-04843 Angela Constance (Livingston) (SNP):
That the Parliament recognises the importance of the UN International Day of Democracy, which is held on 15 September each year; acknowledges the value of this initiative in providing an opportunity to review the state of democracy in the world today; applauds the underlying principles that stress the need to promote democratisation, development and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and supports the principles underlying the United Nation’s affirmation that “while democracies share common features, there is no single model of democracy and that democracy does not belong to any country or region” and endorses the affirmation that democracy is “a universal value based systems based on the freely expressed will of people to determine their own political, economic, social and cultural systems, and their full participation in all aspects of life”.
Dabir then explained that the United Nations Association of Edinburgh was a branch of the UNA-UK, which itself was a member of the World Federation of the United Nations Associations (WFUNA), emphasising that the UN-Associations were Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), and were independent of the United Nations. They promoted rule of international laws, Human Rights,Equality and a strong, credible and effective United Nations. 
Following are the presentation outlines:
Brief historical background
Key elements of democracy today
Different types of democracy
Compulsory Voting
Democracy Ranking
Democracy Index & Happiness
Index and their relationship
Comparison of democracy in
some countries
Democracy in the United Nations
Questions & Discussions 
Brief Historical Background
Ancient Iran had a type of Proto-Democracy in sixth century BCE (1). But the Emperor Darius the Great declared that: “The best monarchy was better than the best oligarchy”. Thereafter, we had about 2500 years of dictatorship of kings in Iran until the World War II, after which we had a short period of democracy. Unfortunately, the democratically elected Prime Minister, Dr. Mohammad Mosaddegh, who had nationalized the oil industry in Iran was toppled in a coup d’état, organized by the American CIA, supported by the British Intelligence. The king (shah) was reinstalled who promptly organized for the oil concessions to be give to the oil companies of the ‘Western Democracies’! He brutally ruled the country for 25 years, until his reign was dismantled by the Islamic Revolution, which brought a theocratic dictatorship to power, which is still ruling in the country(2).
Ancient India had a type of democracy (3), in some regions about sixth Century BCE according to Diodorus (a Greek historian), without offering any detail.
Ancient Athens had a democracy (500 - 330 BCE), Citizens could directly take part in political decisions. In fact the word ‘democracy’, meaning ‘rule by the people’ originated in Athens from that time. But slaves, women and alien residents were not considered to be citizens, therefore had no right to vote!
The two great philosophers of Athens, Plato and Aristotle, both deplored democracy! Plato on the grounds that it handed control of the government from experts in governing to populist demagogues and Aristotle on the grounds that government by the people was in practice government by the poor, who could be expected to expropriate the rich.
However, with the preconditions that we now have for democracy, these concerns are no more.
Is there a Perfect Form of Government?
According to Winston Churchill and some other prominent leaders, there is no such thing as the ‘perfect form of government’ any other form of government produces even less desirable results than democracy.
The 4-Dimension Principle
“The laws and rules of life should change with time (1D) and space (3D)”.
This principle also applies to democracy, i.e., democracy has different forms in different areas of the world and changes with time (DT).
The 11 Key Elements of Democracy Today
1. A written constitution
2. General and equal right to vote
3. Majority rule
4. Free and fair elections and secrecy of ballot
5. Guarantee of basic Human Rights.
6. Protection of minority rights.
7. Separation of Powers between:
Executive, Legislative, Judicial and Publicly funded Media.
8. A neutral, impartial police force.
9. Equality before the law.
10. Focus on public interest and
11. Absence of corruption.
Types of Democracy
• Athenian democracy was direct (a sort of referendum), see the historical background above.
• After 17th century, mostly indirect democracy was in place: people elected representatives, who took decisions.
• Most democracies today are representative.
• Occasionally some referenda are carried out on important issues.
• Different types of collegial voting are carried out in some countries, e.g., in USA, Russia and China.
[Russia is considered by some to have a Managed democracy]
[China, according to its own Constitution is: Socialist democratic dictatorship]
[Iran: Theocratic democratic dictatorship]!
The words democracy/democratic in the latter three countries, refer to the controlled election processes within the limitations imposed by the regime. Some of the above-mentioned 11 key elements of democracy are missing.
Worldwide Surveys show that (4):
• Most people in most places want democracy.
• Democracy by external intervention is discredited.
• Globalization, increasing wealth, education, and electronic communication favour democracy.
Compulsory Voting (5)
There are 32 countries with Compulsory Voting, of which 19 enforce it:
Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, Fiji, Liechtenstein, Nauru, Peru, Singapore, Switzerland (compulsory in the Canton of Schaffhausen only), Turkey, Uruguay.
Arguments For Compulsory Voting
• When all eligible voters vote then government represents majority of population.
• Less politically active people are not neglected.
• Voting is a "civic duty", like paying taxes.
• Society will function more harmoniously.
• People think more about the tough issues.
• People may cast blank votes, if they do not have any preference.
Polls are held on a weekend for working people to vote. Mobile voting is provided for old age homes and hospitals. Postal voting may be allowed.
Arguments Against Compulsory Voting
• Voting is not a duty; it is a civil right.
• CV infringes a basic freedom.
• Fining recalcitrant voters is oppressive.
• Some may vote only to fulfil legal requirements.
• Can infringe other basic rights, e.g., some Jehovah's Witnesses do not wish to participate in political activities. If you force them to vote you have deprived them of practising their religion as they wish!
Democracy Ranking
There is no consensus on how to measure democracy. Brief accounts are presented here on a couple of groups who have attempted, in their own ways, to perform some ranking:
• ‘The Freedom House’, an NGO in the USA, carried out ranking from 1970. In 2004 they rated all 192 countries of the UN in terms of political and civil freedoms and labelled the countries as: "free“, "partly free" and "not free"(6)
• The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) of the Economist newspaper made an extensive indexing exercise in 2006 and repeated it in 2008, some of the results of which are presented here (7).
Their indexes ranged from 0 to 10 with Sweden rating the highest at 9.88 and North Korea the lowest at 0.86. The EIU’s index is based on the ratings for 60 indicators grouped in five categories:
• Electoral process and pluralism
• Functioning of government
• Political participation
• Political culture
• Civil liberties
For their evaluation they used information obtained from the following sources: Experts’ assessments, World Values Surveys; public opinion surveys on the political participation, political culture, civil liberties and functioning of government, Eurobarometer surveys, Gallup polls, Latin American Barometer, and national surveys, participation and voter turnout and balance between legislative and executive powers.
They grouped the countries into four types as shown in Table 1. 
UK scores lower than Sweden in all categories, particularly in political participation. There seems that people in the UK are less inclined to participate in political activities, political debates, party membership, voting etc. than in Sweden.
Sweden scores less than 10 in ‘political culture’ probably because of their monarchy, which is by inheritance and the monarch heads the Council of State, the Council on Foreign Affairs and recognizes new Cabinets and he/she is continually briefed on governmental issues(8). There may be other factors affecting this category of indicators.
s
Figure 1 - Democracy Index Map by the Economist, 2008
Using the above-mentioned indexes the democracy map is drawn as shown above.(9)
Brighter colours represent more democratic countries. Countries with index below 2 (clearly authoritarian) are shown in black.
Changes between 2006 and 2008:
There were eight upgrades as follows:
• From authoritarian to hybrid: Bhutan, Nepal, Pakistan and Sierra Leone
• From flawed to full democracy: Italy and South Korea
• From hybrid to flawed democracy: Nicaragua and Thailand
There were three downgrades from flawed democracy to hybrid regimes:
Bangladesh, Hong Kong and Mali.
The average index of the 167 States increased from 5.52 in 2006 to 5.55 in 2008.
On the whole democracy seems to have increased, in 2006-2008 period.
However, the current economic crisis/depression may work against democracy.
Gross National Happiness (GNH) – Index
This is an attempt to define quality of life. The term GNH was coined in 1972 by Bhutan's former King Jigme Singye Wangchuck (10). Veenhoven, R., provided a World Database of Happiness in 2009 (11 & 12).
GNH was calculated as a function of the per capita of the following seven measures (11):
1. Economic Wellness: income to price index ratio, debt...
2. Environmental Wellness: pollution, noise, traffic…
3. Physical Wellness: health…
4. Mental Wellness: mental health, use of antidepressants...
5. Workplace Wellness: joblessness, job changes, complaints, lawsuits…
6. Social Wellness: discrimination, safety, divorce rates, conflicts, crime rates...
7. Political Wellness: level of democracy, individual freedom, foreign conflicts... 
Figure 2 - Happiness Index Map 2009(13 & 14)
Happiest = Green > Purple > Blue > Orange > Red = Least Happy; Grey = Data not available.
Comparison of the democracy and the happiness maps shows close relationship between them. Plotting the available two sets of indexes, of the 131 nations, in a chart produced Figure 3. 
Figure -3: Happiness Index vs. Democracy Index. The democracy index (DI) ranges, as defined by the Economist Intelligence Unit, are shown.
There is a clear positive correlation between the DI and HI for countries in which there is some sort of democracy. The HI of S. Arabia, UAE and Iran may be high due to their per capita oil income. The unhappiest nation (among the 131 in this exercise) being Tanzania followed by Zimbabwe. Nordic countries are the most democratic and have also happier nations.
Democracy in the United Nations
The United Nations has a Democracy Fund (UNDEF), which has entirely voluntary contributors. Its main objective is: “…to promote democracy throughout the world by providing assistance to projects that consolidate and strengthen democratic institutions and facilitate democratic governance.” (15)
The UN defines the democracy as being a “universal and indivisible core value of the United Nations”, it is not “owned” by any, nor does it follow one particular model.
The top 13 contributors as of 29 June 2009 are shown in Table 13:
15 (of the 30) ‘fully democratic’ States (as defined by the EIU) that had not contributed to the UNDEF as of 29 June 2009 were: Austria, Canada, Costa Rica, Finland, Greece, Iceland, Luxembourg, Malta, Mauritius, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, South Korea, Switzerland and Uruguay.
22 States listed by the Economist as not-‘fully democratic’ but which have contributed to the UNDEF were: Bulgaria, Chile, Croatia, Cyprus, Ecuador, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Iceland, India, Israel, Latvia, Lithuania, Mongolia, Morocco, Peru, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Senegal, Sri Lanka and Turkey.
We (in the United Nations Associations) urge all countries to contribute to this fund.
The United Nations has also an Electoral Assistance Unit, the purpose of which is mainly “…for strengthening the role of the United Nations in enhancing the effectiveness of the principle of periodic and genuine elections and the promotion of democratization.” (16 & 17) Assistance is provided to the member states upon their request.
Democracy Process within the United Nations
• A sort of collegial semi-democracy seems to prevail in the UN! Delegates are sent from all types of regimes to the UN to represent their nations.
• Only about 30 of the member states are themselves fully democratic (according to the Economist Intelligence Unit).
• There are five permanent (P5) and 10 rotating members in the United Nations Security Council, which is the most powerful body in that organization.
• The P5 have veto power.
• All states have the same and equal votes in the UN General Assembly. The 1,300 million people of China have one vote and the 0.8 million people of Qatar have also one vote!
Possible Weighting of Votes in the UN
Following is a hypothetical exercise to see the approximate effect of weighting the votes of the UN member nations according to their population or their contribution to the budget of the United Nations.
If Qatar had 1 vote and the votes were to be weighted by Population, then China would have to be assigned ~1625 votes and USA ~375 votes!
If Qatar had 1 vote and votes were to be weighted by the Budget contributions* they made to the UN in 2006; China would get ~35 and USA ~34 votes!
* Countries pay to the UN according to their economic capacity, with a cap of 22%, which is used only by the USA
Although at this point in time, the above weighting is entirely hypothetical, there may come a time at which some sort of weighting will be necessary, at least within the UNGA, to make the process more equitable and democratic.
World Federation of the United Nations Associations Declaration of August 2009 on Democracy.
The WFUNA had a conference in Seoul in August 2009, to which Dr. Gari Donn attended as a delegation of the UK. They had the following statement about democracy in their final declaration (18 & 19):
“…We emphasize the importance of democracy as a means of securing human rights and promoting the rule of law, urge expanded UN roles in election monitoring, and urge governments to increase their support to the UN Democracy Fund.”
And finally, let us join and work together towards a fairer and more democratic world!
Dabir Tehrani
September 2009
References:
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy#Ancient_origins
2. ‘All the Shah’s Men’, An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror, Stephen Kinzer, John Wiley & Sons ISBN 0-471-26517-9, printed in USA
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy#Ancient_origins
4. http://www.economist.com/markets/rankings/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12499352
5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting
7. http://www.economist.com/markets/rankings/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12499352
8. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Sweden
9. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
+bhutan&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk
11. Veenhoven, R., Inequality-Adjusted Happiness in 131 nations 2000-2008, World Database of Happiness, Rank Report 2009-4a,
12. www.worlddatabaseofhappiness.eur.nl/
13. http://www1.eur.nl/fsw/happiness/hap_nat/findingreports/RankReport2009-4a.htm#Top
14. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World_happiness.png
15. http://www.un.org/democracyfund/index.htm
16. UN GA Resolution 54/173, Feb 2000.
17. http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/
18. http://www.wfuna.org/
A.RES.54.173.En?Opendocument
19. http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/
A.RES.54.173.En?Opendocument