Democratic Governance and Institutional Reforms

10 Nov 2024 | Insights, Politics, Armenia

Abstract

This article examines the evolution of democratic governance and institutional reforms in Armenia, emphasizing the post-World War II period when global emphasis shifted to democracy as a foundation for peace. The collapse of the Soviet Union positioned Western liberal democracy as a standard, yet contemporary realities reveal alternative governance models. The development of democratic systems and the rule of law is complex, particularly in large states, and success hinges on public engagement.

Armenia's transition from totalitarianism to democracy is marked by challenges, including corruption and a shadow economy influenced by its Soviet legacy. The "rules of the game" of democracy in Armenia require active political participation and effective public governance. However, recent crises have exposed institutional weaknesses, prompting a comprehensive public administration reform strategy in 2022.

Institutional reforms in Armenia face risks from manipulated political power and increased non-governmental activities serving external interests. The party system remains flawed, with parties often serving specific interests rather than ideological commitments. Media contributes to political division through hate speech and disinformation, underscoring the urgent need for improved political socialization and education to foster a more informed and engaged citizenry.

Despite these challenges, Armenia has made significant strides in democratic governance since the Velvet Revolution, with improved global rankings in freedom of expression, democracy, and corruption perceptions. The post-2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war tested democratic institutions but also provided an opportunity for democratic renewal. By addressing underlying issues and learning from past conflicts, Armenia is on a path to strengthening its democratic institutions and building a more resilient political system, offering reassurance and confidence in its future.

Background: In the period after World War II, the world community had entered a new stage of development as a new dimension was given to the search for world order. The idea of lasting peace was now based on spreading the principles of freedom and democracy through representative government. Western liberal democracy became a benchmark for states after the collapse of the Soviet Union, as modern theorists like F. Fukuyama testified in "The End of History." Fukuyama argued that the Cold War ended with the victory of liberal democracy, suggesting it was the best alternative at the time. However, it's difficult to consider democracy as having no alternatives in modern realities since there are many examples in the current system of international relations that indicate the opposite.

History shows that developing and implementing a concept based on democracy and the rule of law, which guarantees political stability and economic success, is not easy. The larger the state, the more difficult it is to implement democracy successfully. Success depends on how much the population is interested in actively or passively contributing to this goal. The unifying ideas were different at different stages of social development; previously it was religion, now it is democracy.

The history of the Third Republic of Armenia is short, making it difficult to clearly define the political system and record democracy as an established reality. Despite efforts to strengthen democracy, complications remain from the country's transition from totalitarianism. Armenia is a country with a transitional economy whose institutional environment needs reforms. Before assessing the current institutional environment in Armenia, it is necessary to analyze the transitional period of the formation of the Third Republic of Armenia because the existing institutional systems were formed on the foundation of former Soviet institutions that were not ready for a new economic model. This resulted in the growth of corruption and the shadow economy. Overcoming corruption remains a significant challenge, essential for improving the quality of the country's economic institutions and promoting efficiency and inclusiveness.

The "rules of the game" of democracy require a democratic style of governance and institutions, active participation in political processes, and public-state governance. The challenges faced by Armenia in recent years, particularly the pandemic and war, have shown the imperfections and ineffectiveness of these institutions. In response, Armenia launched a public administration reform strategy in 2022 to address these issues, aiming to reform state departments, other state bodies, including regional and local self-government bodies.

Although a democratic country implies freedoms, managing these freedoms involves risks. Relations between the subject and object of political power can be manipulated by those in power, potentially forming public opinion. In Armenia, institutions are often perceived more through individuals than through systems, making the country vulnerable when influential individuals are discredited. Additionally, increased activities of various non-governmental organizations and other institutions raise security risks, as they can serve external interests. Small states like Armenia, which lack extensive resources and capabilities, become more vulnerable in this situation.

The party system in Armenia illustrates the imperfection of institutions. Initially characterized by a presidential system that granted unlimited powers to the president and the ruling party, it weakened the mechanism of democratic checks and balances. Parties in Armenia often serve specific groups or individuals rather than fostering society-state communication. Without a unifying ideology, elections are frequently won through effective propaganda rather than ideological commitment. Even after constitutional reforms and the adoption of a parliamentary model, entrenched political morals prevent parties from adopting ideological orientations and forming connections with the electorate. The lack of a unifying ideology exacerbates existing problems and conflicts, and the political culture remains underdeveloped.

Media also plays a role in deepening political divisions, promoting divisive rhetoric that hinders democratic consolidation. The abuse of free speech leads to widespread hate speech, with legislative responses, like the criminalization of "grave insult" in 2021, facing significant criticism and being rescinded. Furthermore, the spread of disinformation is prevalent across communication platforms, making society susceptible to manipulation due to a lack of political socialization and low educational levels.

Since the 1990s, Armenia's state administration has undergone significant reforms, establishing democratic institutions. Despite some failures due to political expediency and fragmented reforms, substantial progress has been made. Notably, Armenia's rankings in global indices for freedom of expression and corruption perceptions have improved significantly since 2017:

Freedom in the World: Armenia's rating by Freedom House improved from "Partly Free" with a score of 45/100 in 2017 to 54/100 in 2024.
Democracy Index: The Economist Intelligence Unit upgraded Armenia's status from a "Hybrid Regime" with a score of 4.79 in 2017 to 5.49 in 2024.
Corruption Perceptions Index: Transparency International reported an improvement in Armenia's ranking from 107th/180 in 2017 to 63rd/180 in 2024.
Press Freedom Index: Reporters Without Borders ranked Armenia 49th out of 180 countries in 2024, up from 79th in 2017.

The Velvet Revolution marked a significant step in Armenia's democratic journey, increasing political participation and accountability. Post-2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, democratic institutions were tested, with the 2021 parliamentary elections reinforcing the democratic process despite political turmoil. Democratic mechanisms have since played a crucial role in government accountability and public discourse.

The war also amplified political polarization, posing challenges for democratic governance. However, it also presents an opportunity for democratic renewal. By addressing the war's root causes and learning from its outcomes, Armenia can strengthen its democratic institutions and build a more resilient political system.

Authors: Nushik Petrosyan, Ph.D. Candidate, Nexus Intellect Research NGO

Chief Research Officer: Verej Isanians, Ph.D., Nexus Intellect Research NGO