Mediaboss Marketing

In the final week of its term, the U.S. Supreme Court unmasked the so-called independent state legislature (ISL) theory for what it was: a crackpot idea without judicial support. In a 6-3 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote: The Elections Clause does not insulate state legislatures from the ordinary exercise of state judicial review.

Since then, Republicans have largely been muted in their response. A few suggested that they would continue to fight against expanding voting rights.

Tim Moore, the Republican speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives who brought the case to the Court, was uncharacteristically gracious in defeat: Today the United States Supreme Court has determined that state courts may rule on questions of state law even if it has an impact on federal elections law. Ultimately, the question of the role of state courts in congressional redistricting needed to be settled and this decision has done just that.

Most of those who litigated Moore v. Harper are simply relieved the case is over. As for the broader impact of the case, I offered my opinion the day after the decision. A dangerous legal theory had been rejected and [a]nyone who cares about free and fair elections should rejoice.

Not everyone in the pro-democracy camp agreed with me. Some insisted that the 6-3 victory was, in fact, a secret defeat. In the words of one prognosticator, Moore contained a ticking time bomb for future Supreme Court interference in state court election cases.

On the other side were those who overhyped Moore as singularly historic. One conservative former federal judge called the decision the single most important constitutional case for American Democracy since the Nations Founding almost 250 years ago.

We cannot let the focus on this one case, as important as it was, obscure the fact that threats to our democracy come in many forms.

Liberal critics of the decision in Moore point out that it contains language suggesting that the Court could, in some future case, hold that a state court has overstepped its bounds of interpreting and applying state law. But that isnt new. Though rare, federal courts have asserted and exercised that power before. There is nothing in the Courts opinion that suggests any new standard. Indeed, the majority expressly declines to establish any specific test.

Pundits who decry that Moore planted the seeds of future destruction are cynically out of step with reality. Moore is a significant victory for voters in the here and now. As a result of the Courts ruling, 28 active state court voting and redistricting cases can continue unimpeded by the ISL theory.

Liberal hand wringing about its latent dangers that someday might materialize misses the point. Pro-democracy wins need not be infallible or permanent to be important, and we do ourselves no favors by overlooking significant victories for fear of impending defeats.

It is wrong, however, to claim that Moore is somehow the most important pro-democracy case ever decided. Baker v. Carr established the principle of one person one vote. Various other cases established the primacy of the right to vote and recognized Congress constitutional power to protect minority voting rights and the Voting Rights Act. In its broadest interpretation, Moore simply reaffirmed the principles of judicial review first articulated 220 years ago in Marbury v. Madison.

Moore isnt even the most important case involving presidential elections. Bush v. Gore the original case that started the right-wing down the ISL rabbit hole led to the seating of a president who otherwise lost the popular vote. While former leaders of the Federalist Societys takeover of the judiciary might look past Bush, liberals remember it all too well.

If Moore wasnt the blockbuster its supporters laud or its critics fear, then what was it?

Moore, like Allen v. Milligan the Alabama voting case also decided by the Court this term was a victory for the status quo in a world where we fear a conservative Supreme Court will upend established precedent to roll back the clock on progressive policies. Both cases involved right-wing lawyers advancing novel interpretations to undermine fundamental protections for voting rights. And in both cases the Court ruled in favor of democracy by rejecting those conservative attacks.

Like the 60 plus courts that refused to indulge former President Donald Trump and his allies attempts to disrupt the peaceful transition of power, the Court in Moore refused to indulge right-wing attempts to disrupt our fundamental system of checks and balances. This is no small victory. This is a Court that in other areas proved willing to cast aside settled precedent and the fundamental rights they protected. Status quo is not something we can afford to take for granted.

But Moore hardly puts an end to the ongoing threats to democracy. Even as the debate over the impact of Moore continues, Republican legislatures, including in North Carolina, are enacting new laws to undermine free and fair elections. Supporters of the Big Lie continue to degrade our election systems. And courts continue to consider and hear critical cases that will have an enormous impact on the 2024 election.

Sadly, if conservative judges want to undermine voting rights, there are ways for them to do it other than to deploy a clumsy theory like the ISL theory. We cannot let the focus on this one case, as important as it was, obscure the fact that threats to our democracy come in many forms, and the judiciary continues to guard the gates between the Big Lie and free and fair elections. There will always be new cases with new theories to threaten democracy. Voting rights lawyers fight these cases day-in and day-out winning some and losing some.

Moore v. Harper was a victory for democracy. It was an important repudiation of a radical fringe theory that could have immeasurably damaged our country. Lets celebrate it for what it was and focus on the challenges ahead.

More:
Revisiting Moore v. Harper and the Threats to Democracy - Democracy Docket

RingTrue By Yemi Adebowale

Phone 08054699539

Email: yemi.adebowale@thisdaylive.com

The retreat organised by the National Institute for Legislative and Democratic Studies (NILDS) in Ilorin, Kwara State last Monday provided another opportunity to deconstruct why majority of Nigerians are not enjoying the dividends of democracy. Over 24 years after the return of democracy, there is still so much pain in our land; so much hunger, so much killing by terrorists, so much disease, so much poverty, so much insecurity and so much unemployment. Whereas, democracy is more about the security and welfare of the people.

At the NILDS retreat, the former chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Professor Attahiru Jega, was saddled with this responsibility of dissecting why Nigerians are not enjoying the dividends of democracy. He did not disappoint. Jega did a good job. Im not a fan of Jega, considering his inglorious role in the 2015 presidential election that led to the victory of Muhammadu Buhari. But I totally agree with his submissions at the NILD retreat. Nigerians have not been able to enjoy the dividends of democracy since the advent of the present democratic rule in 1999 because of bad governance, a product of bad leadership. That was the core of his submission. Yes, bad governance at all levels of government has been the curse of Nigeria. Households are gasping for breath.

Jega contends, Nigeria has been on a trajectory of liberal democratic development continuously for 23 years, since 1999 when the military returned to the barracks. While every four years, we have routinely elected representatives into the legislative and executive arms of government, there is consensus that these elements of liberal democratic development have not yet translated into substantive socioeconomic development that satisfies the needs and aspirations of the overwhelming majority of citizens.

The so-called dividends of democracy have not yet been provided for the majority of Nigerians. Unfortunately, there has been bad leadership, not that there are no good leaders in the country but they are in short supply while the democratic institutions are also weak. Leadership at all tiers of the Nigerian federation has not been good; it has been essentially bad and undemocratic, characterised by bad, rather than good democratic governance. Many national organisations and institutions have been afflicted/affected by this tendency towards bad governance. We also need institutions that can inspire good governance.

Jega argues that to enjoy the dividends of democracy, this country badly needs transformational leaders; leaders who must be responsible, honest and responsive. Leaders with integrity, who can inspire citizens.

No doubt, leadership has failed the citizens in our over two decades of democratic evolution, resulting in bad governance. At the federal level, virtually all the presidents weve had have been a big letdown. Perhaps, late Umaru YarAdua would have made a difference. Unfortunately, ill health did not allow this to happen. The nations socio-economic conditions continue to deteriorate due to bad leadership. Security, healthcare, roads, education, employment and the rest are all in shambles after 24 years of democracy. Within our 24 years of democracy, Nigeria emerged the country with the highest number of people living under poverty, pushing aside India. This is an emblem of disgrace that confirms the failure of leadership in Nigeria.

Rising inflation, which hit 22.41 per cent in May this year, has pushed more Nigerians into poverty. In the June 2023 Nigeria Development Update, the World Bank said that the accelerating inflation pushed an additional four million Nigerians into poverty in the first five months of 2023. Inflation had earlier between January and October 2022 pushed five million more Nigerians into poverty.

This means that between 2022 and 2023, not less than nine million Nigerians have been pushed into poverty as a result of inflation, largely brought about by inept leadership. The 2022 Multidimensional Poverty Index survey of the National Bureau of Statistics revealed that 63% of persons living within Nigeria (133 million people) are in the multidimensionally-poor club. They are not just poor, but multidimensionally-poor. The 2023 figures will be higher, no thanks to unending failed leadership at all levels of governments. The pain at home has led to a surge in the number of Nigerians leaving this country in search of greener pastures. In a desperate bid to escape the poverty at home, many of them have been turned to slaves abroad.

The future remains bleak for the over 133 million multidimensionally-poor Nigerians. This is because of the removal of fuel subsidy and further depreciation of the Naira by the new government at the centre. It simply means that majority of Nigerians will still not enjoy the dividends of democracy under the Tinubu government. All the signs are visible just after 48 days in office. The World Bank predicts that 7.1 million more Nigerians would become poor because of the removal of subsidy. It noted that many households would be in crisis due to the depreciation of their income.

While Nigerians are being pummeled by these anti-people policies, the Tinubu government continues to plead for understanding, patience and sacrifice by the people. Those running government are living big while asking traumatised Nigerians to further shed weight.

Now, I need to address this issue of subsidy removal again. Petrol selling at almost N600 per litre is beyond the income of an average Nigerian. If we have a government that truly wants Nigerians to enjoy the dividends of democracy, subsidy on petroleum products shouldnt have been fully removed. It is so simple to achieve this. We were told that a large quantity of the petroleum products imported into this country, for which the government pays subsidies, are smuggled to neighbouring countries. We were also told that there is a lot of fraud in the subsidy regime. There was a time that the former head of Customs, Hammed Ali, challenged the NNPCL to show how it imports over 70 million litres of petrol into the country daily, without his men at the ports knowing. NNPCL did not respond.

This is what Im driving at: I expect a good government that wants Nigerians to enjoy the dividends of democracy to block these holes in the petrol subsidy regime and also block the smuggling of petroleum products with all its might. Those running this government know all the subsidy thieves. So, they can be tamed if this government so desires. Likewise, if smuggling is blocked, there will be at least 60 percent reduction in the money spent on petrol importation.

This can be done in this modern era of protecting borders with technology, particularly using drones. Blocking subsidy thieves and smuggling can cut subsidy expenditure by at least 60 percent. So, instead of spending about $10 billion annually on subsidy, it would come down to around $4 billion. The strategy for the long run is to work on local refining. This is the way to go for a leader that wants Nigerians to enjoy the dividends of democracy.

Countries without concrete and institutionalised support for households are largely poverty-stricken. This is the difference between developed and third world countries. In the United Kingdom, households challenged by the rising cost of electricity will each get 400 support this year. Nearly 15 million households have each received 150 to help with the cost of living. More than 2 billion has been handed to 15 million households in England under the scheme.

In Nigeria, we dont have institutionalised social security schemes. No income support, no child support, no unemployment benefit, no disability benefit. Nothing! Yet, we are being forced to buy everything at market price. So, what is the essence of having a government?

This talk about giving 12 million households N8,000 each for six months by Tinubu is balderdash. Just 12 million households will benefit out of the estimated 45 million households in Nigeria. Besides, how will N8000 for just six months solve the massive financial crisis created by the removal of subsidy and devaluation of the Naira for these devastated Nigerian households? What happens after the six months? The security and welfare of the people must always be the priority of the state in a democracy. This is food for thought for President Bola Tinubu today.

A Word for IG Egbetokun

In my earlier note to the Acting Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, I urged him to end killing of policemen by terrorists without consequences. This has persisted for too long and must be tamed. Unfortunately, early signs in this direction by the Acting IG are not encouraging.

For example, five days after terrorists killed four police officers at a checkpoint on Gusau-Bungudu Road (Bungudu LGA of Zamfara State) the killers are yet to be apprehended. Terrorists have also killed without repercussions scores of policemen in the South-east after Egbetokun emerged Acting IG. These happenings are really depressing and must be stopped.

My dear Egbetokun, this is not the way to go if you want an end to the killing of policemen by terrorists. You must consistently avenge the killing of your men by terrorists and drive a clear message to them that there will be no longer room for nonsense. When terrorists kill policemen, they must pay the supreme price. Of course, when they kill civilians too, they must also be made to pay the supreme price. This will deter the remaining guerrillas from further atrocities.

Tinubu, You Are Not President of the South-west

There is a list of Senior Special Assistants, Special Assistants and Personal Assistants appointed by President Tinubu flying around. It has 20 names and 80 percent of those on the list are from the South-west, Tinubus base. Precisely 16 of the 20 names on the list are from the South-west. Well, it has not been officially released. At the same time, Tinubu has not denied it. So, it is authentic.

I can confirm that those on the list have received formal letters. Mr. President, this list is lopsided and unconstitutional. In all appointments, you must reflect federal character. That is the position of the law. During the tenure of Goodluck Jonathan as President, his Principal Staff Officer was a Fulani man. My dear Tinubu, that is the meaning of being the President of Nigeria. Even your personal aides must reflect federal character.

Mr. President, I need to remind you of Section 14(3) of the 1999 Constitution, which emphatically states that the composition of the government of the federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect federal character and promote national loyalty. This provision is to ensure that there shall be no predominance of a few states or a few ethnic groups or other factional divisions in government or any of its agencies.

The bane of former President Muhammadu Buhari was his boundless clannishness in appointments and all his actions. President Tinubu, I want you to retire into your study and spend quality time looking at this list of 20 again. Does it look like a pan-Nigeria list? To move this country forward, you must run away from nepotism. All appointments must reflect all the parts of this country. So, shred that list of 20 immediately and reconstitute it, reflecting federal character.

Continued here:
Dividends of Democracy Still a Pipe Dream - THISDAY Newspapers

Voters in Spain will go the polls in a snap election on July 23. The Socialist government could fall to a surging rightist coalition. This is hardly shocking: A European country enacts a basic ritual of democracy and accepts the principle of alternation in power. The current election campaign, however, is tearing the country apart. Vitriol has displaced civil debate.

This election is a good moment to appreciate the near-miracle of Spanish democracy.

No country in Western Europe has had a more improbable rise out of despotism. The brutally repressive Spanish Inquisition, in which errant believers were stretched on racks or burned at the stake, lasted for centuries. Spain exported its intolerant and repressive culture to Latin America, bequeathing to the continent a poisoned legacy of rigid class structures, deep racism, and ruthless violence. Spains fascist leader Francisco Franco, who ruled for four decades until his death in 1976, embodied those values.

Get Today in Opinion

Globe Opinion's must-reads, delivered to you every Sunday-Friday.

As Franco approached death, he named one of his close collaborators, Admiral Luis Carrero Blanco, to succeed him. That seemed to guarantee a continuation of fascist rule. But on a December morning in 1973, terrorists blew up Carreros car as he drove to church. This was one of the most effective assassinations in modern times. The assassins said they did it because Carrero had become irreplaceable. They were right. With him gone, no one was strong enough to keep the fascists in power. His murder opened Spains path to democracy.

A new political system emerged, centered on an elected parliament and a figurehead king. Spain held its first modern election in 1977, but that didnt seal the deal. Diehard fascists were determined to restore the old dictatorship. In 1981, 200 soldiers charged into Parliament, took legislators hostage, and called on the king to support a return to absolutism. He refused. That ended the uprising.

Although democracy survived, two regions of the country sought to secede. Basques intensified a terror campaign, killing more than 250 people in the late 1970s. Catalan separatists, from the region around Barcelona, also tried to break away from Spain. Through long and bloodstained negotiations, which led to grants of substantial autonomy for both regions, the country was able to hold together.

The crowning moment in Spains transition came when it was admitted to the European Union in 1992. That was its ticket to stability and prosperity. Large EU subsidies have transformed the country into a seemingly stable democracy of 47 million people.

This spring, however, a far-right political party called Vox won sweeping victories in local elections. The far-left party suffered heavy losses. Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, a self-described feminist who has a majority-female cabinet, responded by calling an early election. Polls suggest he may lose. That could mean not just a change of government but a seismic political and social shift.

Polarization has reached levels not seen since the days of dictatorship. Spaniards, like voters in many countries, are in an ornery mood.

Rightist politicians are winning votes by declaring that immigration is out of control; subsidies for the unemployed are so high that they encourage laziness; rights granted to gay and trans people are excessive; sex education in schools has gone too far; and laws against gender violence discriminate against men. Bestselling books echo the backlash against woke ideology. One, called The Trap of Diversity, argues that identity politics divides working people in ways that only benefit the elite. Another, Against the Victim, asserts that people love to claim they are oppressed because that immunizes them against all criticism and certifies their innocence.

This polarization has led some Spaniards to fear that their democracy is in danger. Spain is reaching levels of confrontation like those in the United States and Britain, but without the solidity that comes from centuries of democratic experience, the commentator Andrea Rizzi wrote in the Madrid daily El Pas. The newly emergent far right, she observed, suggests that the adversary is an enemy of the nation and is destroying it and uses a vocabulary reminiscent of authoritarian regimes.

Spains democracy is not yet in danger of collapse, but political debate has degenerated into a level of bitterness the country has not seen since the dictatorship ended nearly half a century ago. This months election may mark the beginning of a new era for Spain not just a change in government but a deepening division that bodes ill for the countrys future.

Stephen Kinzer is a senior fellow at the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University.

Excerpt from:
Polarization will put Spains young democracy to the test - The Boston Globe

On the occasion of the 10th Anniversary of the operationalization of African Governance Architecture (AGA), Members of the African Governance Platform (AGP) held a strategic reflection retreat from 9-11 July 2023 in Nairobi, Kenya on the margin of the African Union Mid-Year Coordination Meeting (MYCM).

The AGA was established in 2011 by an Assembly Decision as a a pan-African platform for dialogue between the various stakeholders mandated to promote good governance and strengthen democracy in Africa, in addition to translating the objectives of the legal and policy pronouncements stipulated in the African Union (AU) shared values instruments.

The strategic reflection retreat discussed the role of the African Governance Platform in promoting peace and security; as well as enhancing synergy and coordination amongst the African Union Commission, AUC, AU organs, Regional Economic Communities (RECs) and the Regional Mechanism (RMs). Discussions also reiterated the importance of setting the tone for the strategic direction and areas of collaboration and coordination over the next five years. The retreat informed the strategic direction of the Platform and identified ways to table the integration and good governance agenda at the MYCM of the Union.

The strategic reflection retreat was an opportunity for members of the African Governance Platform to deliberate on avenues to enhance synergy and collaboration in the implementation of the joint flagship projects that promote the ratification and implementation of African Union Shared Values instruments, with a particular focus on the African Charter on Democracy and Elections in Africa, ACDEG.

During the retreat, members of the African Governance Platform, AGP, identified flagship projects that are aligned to the fulfilment of Aspirations 3 and 4 of Africas Agenda 2063, which calls for an Africa of good governance, democracy, the respect for human rights, justice and the rule of law and a peaceful and secure Africa respectively. As a key flagship initiative, the retreat extended its appreciation to the African Peer Review Mechanism, APRM, in spearheading the development of the African Governance Report, AGR-2023, which will be launched on 12 July 2023 in Nairobi, Kenya on the margins of the MYCM.

There is need for a renewed commitment to unpack the concept of governance, make it an effective, efficient and unshakeable bedrock to support our member states with their efforts to make peace happen, said Ms Patience Chiradza, the Director of Governance and Conflict Prevention at the African Union Commission.

The strategic reflection retreat will be followed by the Second Statutory Technical and Political meetings of the African Governance Platform scheduled to be held on 11 and 12 July 2023 in Nairobi, Kenya.

For further information please contact:

Ms. Makda Mikre Tessema | Democracy and Governance Expert: African Governance Architecture | E-mail: MakdaM@africa-union.org | Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Continue reading here:
Strategic Reflection of The African Governance Platform on ... - African Union

Stephen Handelman is a prize-winning former columnist, foreign correspondent, and senior writer/columnist for TIME magazine and The Toronto Star. He is the author of three books, including the New York Times selection for New & Noteworthy books of 1997 : Comrade Criminal: Russias New Mafiya, the first account of the rise of organized crime in post-Soviet Russia, praised by The NY Times reviewer as a masterly and very courageous job of reporting.

The book is particularly relevant now as Russia pursues its unprovoked war on Ukraine. Many of the dynamic forces revealed by Stephen Handelman in the post-Soviet era continue to drive Russias actions today, and help to understand the role of the military and intelligence services. Thats one reason Stephen Handelman believes it is important for all those who support democracy to understand the role of journalism in a thriving democracy. Today, Stephen Handelman will delve into the reasons journalism remains important.

In 1787, while serving as minister to France in Paris, Thomas Jefferson said, Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.

Stephen Handelman notes that Thomas Jefferson keenly understood what it meant to live in a country where authority could not be questioned. As an essential figure in the Revolutionary War, Thomas Jefferson understood that even when the press reported on subjects that didnt paint him positively, they still played an essential role in a democratic society.

Stephen Handelman believes journalism should hold the powerful accountable and inform the public so that they can make informed decisions when they head to the ballot box. While the news media is shifting rapidly due to technology and a reliance on advertising revenue, a lot of journalism has shifted to punditry. While pundits can sometimes be entertaining, they dont do much to provide the public with information they can use to form their own opinions.

This is important for those who consider journalism the fourth estate. The fourth estate refers to journalism as the fourth branch of the United States government. The first amendment not only calls for free speech but also states that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of the press. Journalism is meant to report the facts and hold those in our most powerful positions accountable to the public.

With information at our fingertips on smartphones, tablets, and television screens, people must understand the source before considering the informations relevancy. Some neutral sources that report the facts still exist and illuminate voices that arent often heard. When newspapers debuted in America, the editors role was to facilitate public discourse by printing the facts of the day.

As columns developed, they were often used to reprint arguments made by people challenging organizations or figureheads in power. It was not uncommon for labor industry workers to submit columns on their working conditions to their local newspapers. These columns helped hold the powerful accountable and put important changes into action. A lot of medical information was also delivered by journalists. Urgent public health news like the 1793 yellow fever epidemic in Philadelphia would have been even worse if people were not made aware of the epidemics progress in their local newspapers.

Readers continued having a place to share their voices via columns in newspapers throughout the 19th century. Editors, in turn, would read the letters sent in and get a better understanding of what issues were most important to their audience. While arguments were just as common back then as they are today, Stephen Handelman notes there was a much more free-flowing dialogue between people on both sides of the aisle. In fact, many columns were followed up with another column from an editor or public person who had a completely different opinion.

As the need to sell ad space grew, the importance of an engaged citizenry slowly started to drop off. A lot of the more serious reporting moved to its own section, and the political affiliations of newspaper owners started to bleed into the content they would allow to be published. Journalism should remain focused on reporting on the actions of the powerful and amplifying the voice of those without power.

Stephen Handelman believes that journalism at its best is impartial and completely independent from both economical and political interests. The coverage of Russia today is hampered by state efforts to persecute Russian as well as foreign journalists, and it is a reminder that autocracies fear most of all a free and open press. And it is a continuing lesson for democracies, even as economic pressures threaten the survival of the press. No matter who hires a journalist, the true boss is the public. If we are to live in a society where the people are in charge, they must be able to make decisions based on accurate information. This is only possible through independent and fearless journalism.

Post Views: 104

See the rest here:
Stephen Handelman Discusses The Role of Journalism in a Thriving ... - Downbeach.com