Democratic Backsliding

Democratic backsliding means a weakening of democracy within a country over time. In comparative politics, it describes the erosion of institutions, rules and practices that make political power accountable, protect citizens’ freedoms and allow genuine electoral competition. It is a process of change, not simply a label for a country whose democracy is imperfect.

What erodes during backsliding

Democracy involves more than holding elections. Backsliding occurs when the conditions that make elections meaningful, or the restraints on those exercising power, become weaker.

• Electoral competition deteriorates when opposition parties face unfair restrictions or incumbents use public institutions and resources to undermine a genuinely competitive contest.
• Civil liberties weaken when freedom of expression, association and peaceful political activity are restricted, reducing citizens’ ability to organise and challenge rulers.
• Institutional accountability declines when legislatures, courts and other oversight bodies lose the independence or capacity needed to scrutinise executive action.
• Rule of law is weakened when laws are applied selectively or those in power evade legal restraints.

How backsliding occurs

Backsliding can involve an abrupt interruption of democratic government, but it can also proceed incrementally while elections and formally democratic institutions remain in place.

• Executive concentration of power can occur through successive changes that weaken checks and balances rather than through a single abolition of democracy.
• Governments may use formally legal procedures to alter institutions in ways that reduce effective competition and oversight; procedural legality alone does not establish democratic substance.
• Media freedom and civic scrutiny can be weakened through censorship, intimidation or restrictions on independent organisations.
• An electoral mandate does not remove constitutional limits on government or the obligation to respect opposition rights and minority protections.

How to identify it without overstating it

The central analytical question is whether democratic safeguards are becoming systematically weaker over time. Assessment therefore requires comparison with an earlier position, rather than judging a political system from one controversial decision.

• Democratic backsliding differs from ordinary policy disagreement, an unpopular government or a peaceful change of ruling party.
• Democratic breakdown denotes the loss of democratic government; backsliding need not reach that endpoint.
• Populism is not synonymous with backsliding: the relevant issue is whether political actors weaken pluralism, competition and institutional restraints.
• The process is not necessarily irreversible; effective institutions and democratic participation can resist or reverse erosion.