What does democracy promise us?

In graduate school, during my democratisation class, I asked the professor teaching the course this question – “What is democracy good for?” This is how he answered me- “Your question is a normative question, and as a social scientist, I do not answer normative questions.” 

I followed up with an explanation of the context for my question.

The assigned reading for class that day was a brilliant political science journal article titled “The consequences of democratisation” by Dr Giovanni Carbone.

The ensuing debate in class seemed to argue that democracy was not “delivering the goods” for countries in places such as Sub-Saharan Africa and perhaps it was in the best interest of countries in the region to seek non-democratic alternatives.

As the debate raged, I asked myself “what is democracy good for?” I have never stopped asking this question since then.

If by arguing that democracy is not “delivering the goods”, then it means we are sure about two things – first, we know exactly what democracy is supposed to deliver, and second, there is overwhelming empirical evidence democracy is falling short.

By establishing what “democracy is good for” my strong belief is that it allows us to hold democracy responsible for the things it promises.

I simply do not want us to “blame” democracy for things it does not promise.

Democracy’s difficult days – The global picture

Democracy is often portrayed as an inherently good thing. I share that belief.

As a result, for a long time, there was an unwillingness to subject democracy to any kind of critique that seemed to question its inherent goodness as a political system.

This has allowed democracy to enjoy a certain level of moral superiority over other forms of political arrangements. 

The recent surge in interest and efforts to “save democracy” is an attempt, in my opinion, to rescue this inherently good thing from becoming bad.

Democracy advocates have coined new phrases such as “democratic retrogression,” “democratic backsliding” or “democratic erosion,” as ways of capturing how this “good” thing – democracy – is becoming “bad.”

The global picture is concerning. Last month (February 2025), the Economic Intelligence Unit released its flagship report Democracy Index for the year 2024.

The theme of the report – “What’s wrong with representative democracy?” captures what I refer to as democracy’s difficult days. 

According to the report, the world’s population and the type of political regime they live under breaks down as follows – 6.6 per cent (Full democracy); 38.4 per cent (Flawed democracy); 15.7 per cent (Hybrid regimes); and 39.2 per cent (Authoritarian regimes).

As the report notes “a failure to fix our democracies will not only have negative domestic political consequences, it will also embolden autocrats everywhere and demoralise those fighting for democracy around the globe.”

Democracy’s difficult days – The Sub-Saharan Africa picture

The democracy index covered 44 countries in the region with a breakdown of regime types as follows – full democracy (1); flawed democracy (6); hybrid regimes (14); and authoritarian (23).

As the report notes, “The score for functioning of government registered by far the biggest decline. This is a consequence of government inefficiency and a growing lack of trust among citizens in governments’ capacity to improve living conditions.”

In the maiden edition of the Afrobarometer survey (1999), 12 countries in the region participated. Across participating countries, 64 per cent expressed satisfaction with the way democracy was working.

n Round 9 (2021-2023), 39 countries participated. In that survey round, only 39 per cent expressed satisfaction with the way democracy was working.

In the case of Ghana, citizens have gone from a high of 80 per cent (Round 4, 2008) expressing satisfaction with the way democracy is working to a low of 50 per cent (Round 10, 2024) expressing same.

This is not withstanding the fact that 73 per cent of Ghanaians express support for democracy in 2024.

The promise of democracy

I often look at the constitutions of countries in trying to discover what democracy promises citizens.

And one clear promise, easily detected in constitutions, is that of rights.

Democracy promises citizens various freedoms that guarantee their ability to fully participate in the political process of their respective countries.

To understand the source of dissatisfaction with democracy then is simply to look at how well the custodians of a country’s constitution are allowing this promise of democracy to flourish.

In a place like Ghana, democracy promises more than just freedom. Chapter Six of the constitution – Directive Principles of State Policy- contains several other promises of democracy where the State is charged with making several provisions to Ghanaians.

The political, economic, social, educational and cultural objectives laid out in the chapter are, in my opinion, what democracy promises the citizens of Ghana.

To understand the Ghanaian dissatisfaction with democracy, one must simply revert to the chapter and examine the extent to which the State is meeting all those laid out objectives.

The writer is the Project Director, Democracy Project