Latest news with #constitutionalDemocracy
Yahoo
05-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Contributor: A refresher course in American truths
Is it possible, at this deeply ideologically divided time, to articulate a set of principles of American constitutional democracy that those across the political spectrum can agree upon? This was our goal in creating, along with Drexel University law professor Lisa Tucker, a project we titled, 'We Hold These Truths.' Our objective was to have a diverse group of individuals draft these principles, to release them on the Fourth of July, and to use them for public education. The first step was to recruit about 20 prominent individuals from across the ideological spectrum to volunteer their time to be part of the drafting effort. As we reached out to people, we were delighted at the enthusiastic response. The drafters included former Republican Govs. Christine Todd Whitman and Brian Sandoval. It included prominent Democrats such as Stacey Abrams, Pete Buttigieg and Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin. Retired four-star Army Gen. Wesley Clark and civil rights lawyer Sherrilyn Ifill were among the first to agree to participate. We recruited a conservative former U.S. Court of Appeals judge, Thomas B. Griffith, and a liberal one, David Tatel. Best-selling author Brad Meltzer joined the drafting group. We added prominent law professors, former Yale Law School dean Harold Koh and New York University professor Melissa Murray. And we succeeded. In a little over a month, we were able to come to unanimous agreement on a set of basic principles of American constitutional democracy. We hope these principles remind us that what unites us as a country, our deeply held underlying values, is greater than what divides us. We decided early on to focus on five areas: the rule of law, democracy and elections, separation of powers, personal freedom, and equality. We divided into five subgroups to work on these topics and to propose principles to the entire drafting group. There then was the opportunity for responses and revisions. The key, of course, was to make the statements sufficiently specific so they were not platitudes, but also general enough to be articulation of basic values. For the rule of law, we stressed that to preserve liberty, fairness and the stability of our democratic society, the power of government and other actors must be limited by law and they must be accountable. All people, no matter their station, must stand equal before the law, subject to the same rules, protections, privileges and sanctions. The rule of law demands due process, that before the government may deprive any person of life, liberty or property, the individual must have a meaningful opportunity to challenge the deprivation before an independent and neutral adjudicator. Law enforcement — investigations, prosecutions, adjudications and pardons — must be conducted according to law, with respect for human dignity and without regard to the personal or political interests of the executive. And the rule of law cannot be preserved without an independent judiciary that is neither subject to intimidation by the executive or legislative branches of government, nor beholden to the demands of political parties. For separation of powers, we stressed that a fundamental structural feature of the Constitution, and its chief safeguard of our liberty, is separating and placing limits upon the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government such that they check and balance one another's power. For democracy and elections, the crucial point is that the one depends on the other. We elect representatives to make the laws we must abide by. To succeed, elections must be transparent and fair. A democratic society enfranchises voters to the fullest extent possible, makes elections accessible and refrains from erecting unnecessary barriers to voting. Voter suppression is antithetical to democracy, and it exists when eligible voters are unable to register to vote, cast a ballot or have that ballot counted. Also, our constitutional republic depends upon our shared commitment to the peaceful transfer of power, to accepting, honoring and respecting election results regardless of whether our preferred candidate wins. The personal freedoms accorded throughout the Constitution and its many amendments are an essential protection against government tyranny and reflect the inherent rights of every person in the United States. Democracy depends on freedom of speech and the press. The government has no right to intimidate or punish anyone simply on the basis of their views and ideas. The Bill of Rights protects those suspected and accused of crimes with provisions that limit police searches and arrests, ensure the privilege against self-incrimination and provide for fair trials. Our society respects fundamental aspects of autonomy, including the liberty to make important decisions about one's life. Finally, equality is a precondition of freedom. We all are free only when each of us, not just some of us, is free from discrimination, exclusion and threat. Our differences are our strength, not our weakness. Where autocracy and authoritarianism demand allegiance to uniformity, democracy demands the opposite — differences of people and opinion. Every person's voice is of equal worth in the workplace, the public square and the voting booth. Equality of opportunity — in education, employment and participation in our democracy — is a right, not a privilege regardless of color, ethnicity, religion, poverty or wealth. The government's decisions about our lives must be free of discrimination, racism, prejudice, and favoritism. Readers can find the principles, beginning July 4, at 249 years after the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Our hope is that Americans of every political persuasion will reaffirm these values, acknowledging that government of, for and by the people — not monarchy, autocracy or religious rule — is the best way to secure life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We are not naive about what can be achieved through this effort. But we strongly believe that there is value in reminding ourselves, in the words of the Declaration of Independence, of the truths that we hold to be self-evident. Erwin Chermerinsky is the dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law and a contributing writer to Opinion Voices. J. Michael Luttig served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit from 1991 to 2006; he was appointed by President George H.W. Bush. If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Mail & Guardian
10-06-2025
- Politics
- Mail & Guardian
The ANC has lost power, yet is still committed to constitutionalism
When the Madiba party lost its parliamentary majority in 2024 it formed a government of national unity. Photo: Delwyn Verasamy If there were to be anything to credit the ANC for, what that thing might be or look like? In some circles, there is a consensus that this thing might be its commitment to the ideals of constitutional democracy and the rule of law, albeit working within the constrained space of the government of national unity (GNU). The Madiba party must have felt deeply hurt and hamstrung to have lost their absolute parliamentary majority on 29 May 2024 but, thank goodness, they did not usurp power by military force, using unconventional means, such as setting the army on the people to keep political power intact, almost tongue in cheek, contradicting former president Jacob Zuma's infamous assertion that the ANC would rule the country until the second coming of Jesus Christ. It is historically true that many former liberation movements have faced a decline in popularity due to a number of factors, including unfulfilled promises of changing people's lives for the better, widespread corruption, poor governance and incompetence. In the case of Zimbabwe, Zanu-PF's loss of political power caused a great rift between the ruling party and the populace — a factor that led to state violence and the hounding of perceived 'political enemies'. There were new challenges in the political landscape, including, as happened in Matabeleland, mass killings in which dissidents — those opposed to Robert Mugabe's rule, were executed. They were chillingly butchered in what would be known as Gukurahundi — a series of mass killings of political dissidents in Zimbabwe committed in the 1980s — on the orders of former president Mugabe. Mugabe faced significant challenges in maintaining his party's popularity and power as Zimbabwe experienced economic decline and political repression. Instead of addressing the underlying issues, he and his party employed a range of tactics to suppress dissent and cling to power, including manipulating the electoral system, restricting the media and engaging in violence against opponents. Ultimately, these tactics were ineffective in the long run and contributed to the 2017 coup that led to Mugabe's resignation. Swapo, Namibia's ruling party, has faced declining popularity due to economic challenges, corruption scandals and internal divisions, leading to a shift in political dynamics. While still the dominant force, the party's dominance has weakened and opposition parties are gaining ground, particularly among younger voters. Swapo has responded to these challenges by addressing the root causes of the decline, such as economic issues and corruption, but also by attempting to solidify its support base through various strategies. In essence, Swapo's handling of its declining popularity involves acknowledging and addressing the problems it faces while also employing tactics to maintain its dominance in Namibian politics. Despite the loss of their outright majority in the national elections of 2024, the ANC continues to remain a significant player in the country's political landscape, committed to constitutionalism, democracy and the rule of law. Although disappointed with the loss of the unfettered power it enjoyed between 1994 and 2024, today the ANC has skilfully stitched together 'dependable' partners to run the country. The partnership includes the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC), whose president, Mzwanele Nyhontso, enjoys less than 1% parliamentary representation, yet President Cyril Ramaphosa has graciously offered him a cabinet position. What can be read into this gesture? The ANC has been walking a political tightrope. In its political calculations it did not think either the Economic Freedom Fighters or the uMkhonto weSizwe party would be a dependable partner in the GNU. The PAC, which was once led by one of the most revered Africanist struggle icons, Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe, remains a credible liberation struggle movement, even with its small parliamentary representation. Nyhontso, whose party is a proponent of land restoration, which the PAC insists must be accompanied by the return of land to the indigenous people — the African people — was given the position of minister of land reform in the GNU. He has committed to fight tooth and nail to have the land returned to the indigenous people. But, with the decline in electoral support, the ANC joins other liberation movements in Africa which, like them, had previously enjoyed strong support as champions of national independence and liberation from colonial rule. This can be attributed to various factors, according to political analysts and other experts, including a change in voter demographics. The younger generations, who didn't experience the harshness of colonialism or apartheid, bring a new dynamic to the political scene, which relates to economic inequality and the need for job creation. For example, the high rate of youth unemployment has become a concern to young prospective voters. In the first quarter of this year, the youth unemployment rate peaked at 46.1%. The youth are not going to put up with this. Politicians' promise that things might look better tomorrow do nothing to calm the anxieties of unemployed young voters. This is exacerbated by allegations of corruption, something that erodes public trust. The ANC, in the past decade, through the leadership of Zuma, experienced a phenomenon in which the country's economic wealth was mortgaged to the Gupta brothers, who are fugitives from justice. Despite the fact that the Zondo commission established in its investigation that multiple incidents of state capture took place in government departments and state-owned enterprises during his presidency, Zuma has stubbornly sought to distance himself from the malfeasance that took place under his watch. Attempting to make sense of the ANC's electoral decline, chief executive officer of the Mapungubwe Institute for Strategic Reflections, Joel Netshitenzhe, wrote in a report: 'Virtually all analyses of the elections converge at the self-evident conclusion that a fundamental shift has occurred in South Africa's body politic. 'But, in large measure, that is where the consensus ends. Among the questions that need further interrogation is whether the plummeting of the ANC's support implies the death of the liberation idea.' The ANC has for a long time been seen as the 'glorious movement of the people'. As the oldest liberation movement in Africa, it is recognised for the pivotal role it played in dismantling apartheid and for leading the country's transition to democracy. Yet, it may not escape criticism for harbouring in its midst leaders such as Zuma, whose presidency allowed corruption to thrive. The ANC is facing new realities. It is no longer the dominant political force. It has to adapt to a more competitive political environment with the renewal project revamped, the decibels of internal wrangles lowered — all of this for the sake of regaining public trust. But, more encouraging, is that it seems the ANC can be trusted as a political party committed to ensuring the country remains a constitutional democracy, despite its own setbacks and the loss of its outright parliamentary majority. Jo-Mangaliso Mdhlela is an independent journalist, a social justice activist, an ex-trade unionist and an Anglican priest.
