[MUSIC] Democracy and human rights are closely linked in the context of the European Convention on Human Rights. In fact the idea of a democratic society is one of the cornerstones of the convention. A convention came into being at a critical moment in European history. During the second World War, human rights had been ruthlessly violated by totalitarian regimes. Nazi and fascist governments had been responsible for gross violations of the rights of their citizens and of many minorities in particular. After the war, western European democracies agreed that totalitarian regimes should never again be able to take power on the European continent. They therefore collectively avowed to protect both democracy and human rights. One of the steps the Western European democracies took to achieve this was the creation of the European Convention. The link between democracy and human rights protection is emphasized in the introductory statement of the convention which we call the preamble. Here the signatory states reaffirm the fundamental rights the convention aims to protect are best maintained by an effective political democracy. But what is democracy? Well, democracy is an ambiguous concept and even experts disagree on what its key features are. The European Court of Human Rights has not provided a clear and unequivocal definition of democracy either. But still, what is really important is that the court has identified some key characteristics of a democratic society. For the court it is a central issue that democracy is more than just a will of the majority. In a court view, a democracy also protects the rights of the minority, and human rights more generally. If for example, the majority of the people in a country would vote in favor of legalizing torture, that would still be undemocratic under the convention. In fact, we may say that the court has identified four key characteristics of democracy. One, the participation of all citizens in political decision making. Two, the peaceful settlement of conflicts. Three, pluralism, and four, the prohibition of discrimination. The first characteristic, the participation of citizens in political decision making, is based on the idea that the power of the state should rely on the will of the people. All citizens must be able to participate. They can do so directly, for example in a referendum. But indirect participation is also possible. Citizens can elect representatives in a parliament or they can elect a president. The second characteristic is that in a democracy conflicts are settled in a peaceful way. Recourse to violence to solve conflicts is considered unacceptable in a democracy. Instead citizens can make a petition to the parliament or they can start a procedure in the courts. The third characteristic of a democracy is pluralism. Pluralism in this context implies that in a democratic society, there has to be room for a diversity of values, opinions, and social groups. In practice, this means, for example, that there must be a diversity of political parties that represent different political opinions. Also, there has to be room for various religions and beliefs, and for a free debate in the media on different political values. The fourth and final characteristic of democracy is the prohibition of discrimination. In a democracy individuals are equally important and have equal dignity, no matter how different they are. And thus they should all be able to participate in social and democratic practices on the basis of equality. Discrimination on grounds such as race, religion, or political opinion is prohibited. And it considered undemocratic to structurally exclude certain groups from political decision making, such as people belonging to a national minority. So, we now know what the main characteristics of democracy are, according to the court. We will now take a closer look at the connection between democracy and human rights. In fact, there appears to be a two-fold link. On the one hand, the court has repeatedly found that certain rights and freedoms guaranteed by the convention are essential to the functioning of an effective political democracy. On the other hand, the concept of democracy can also be a justification for the restriction of the exercise of human rights. Let's first take a look at the human rights that are essential to an effective political democracy. There are many rights that are important here, but some of the key rights are freedom of expression, the freedom of association and assembly, and the rights to vote and to stand for election. The right to freedom of expression of Article 10 of the Convention, is considered to be of vital importance to democracy. The court has stressed time and again that a pluralistic democratic society can only function when everyone can freely express their opinions and can receive the views and ideas of others. Contributions to public and political debate therefore receive particular protection under Article 10. Second, the court has found that the rights to freedom of association and to peaceful assembly of Article 11 of the Convention are essential to the effective functioning of a democratic system. The freedom of the association allows for the establishment and operation of political parties. This is very important because they may help to bring together and channel ideas and views. And they may represent these ideas in a political system. For that reason, parties receive special protection under Article 11. Equally important is the right to demonstrate, which forms part of the freedom of assembly. Demonstrations and protest marches may help individuals to convey their opinions to others. This too contributes to an open society and an effective democratic system. Third, the rights to vote and to stand for election are crucial in any democracy. These rights are protected in the first protocol to the convention. Article 3 of that protocol contains an obligation for states to hold free elections at reasonable intervals by secret ballot. This provision is not phrased in terms of a particular right or freedom. But the court has found that it also guarantees the individual rights to vote and to stand for election. These rights enable citizens to participate in political decision making. As these rights show, there is a close link between the rights in the European Convention and democracy. Many fundamental rights are essential for the functioning of such a democracy. For that reason such democracy related human rights deserve special protection. But the fact of the matter is that most human rights are not absolute. Interestingly, the notion of democracy also plays a role in relation to restrictions of the exercise of convention rights. What can happen for example, is that someone tries to exercise a human right in such a way that important democratic values are undermined. People may establish a political party, for instance, with the aim of overthrowing the system and using violence to achieve that aim. Or they may incite to hatred against a certain group such as Muslims or homosexuals. The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that in those cases restrictions to the freedom of assembly or the freedom of expression can be justified. To protect the core values underlying the democratic system. To conclude, all of this means that there is a close relationship between democracy and human rights. But in practice matters are sometimes really difficult. Political bodies and courts have to search for a delicate balance between protecting democracy, and respecting individual rights and freedoms. That is a key challenge for open societies. [MUSIC]
