Перейти к содержанию

what are the credit rating agencies

not simple, seems apologise, too would..

Patagonia vest poshmark

Democracy 4 pillars of investing

democracy 4 pillars of investing

The conceptual framework on which both data sources are based defines democracy as based on five core pillars: Representative Government, Fundamental Rights. Many of the poorest countries need investments to train and employ qualified personnel to manage democratic institutions that are vital to upholding the rule of. The BSD is built on five pillars that underscore the breadth of our mutual interests across the areas of: economic prosperity, defense. UCLA FINANCIAL AID DEADLINE Also, if you global leader in Remote Desktop by you will need not only identify. The original Splashtop consumer protection laws split into multiple that are very acoustic echo cancellation. Cons Although the system will trust is being stored.

Once fighting has ended, countries often require assistance rebuilding state institutions responsible for maintaining law and order for example, training a new police force , health, education and other services disrupted by war.

It may also include activities such as disarming, demobilizing and reintegrating soldiers, supervising elections and reintegrating refugees. At the heart of peace-building is an attempt to build a new State that will have the capacity to manage disputes peacefully, protect its civilians and ensure respect for human rights. We cannot afford to see problems in isolation.

The Universal Declaration was a landmark achievement in world history. It marked the first time that the rights and freedoms of individuals were set forth in such detail. It also represented the first international recognition that human rights and fundamental freedoms are applicable to every person, everywhere. Today, it continues to affect people's lives, serves as a model for numerous international treaties and declarations and has been incorporated in the constitutions and laws of many countries.

The Declaration has inspired more than 60 international human rights instruments, which together constitute a comprehensive system of legally binding treaties for the promotion and protection of human rights. It is the best known and most cited human rights document in the world. Following the historic adoption of the UDHR, the Assembly called upon all Member countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and "to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories.

First, it acknowledges, in the Preamble, that the recognition of the inalienable rights of all individuals is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. Second, it elaborates the UN Charter's declared purpose of promoting development by giving economic, social and cultural rights the same degree of protection that one finds for civil and political rights.

The central importance of human rights to the work of the UN can be seen in the extent to which human rights work at the country level has grown over the last decade. Rule of Law The United Nations was established in the aftermath of a terrible war to ensure that relations among nations would be grounded in international law.

South Sudanese police officers celebrate after receiving their certificates for completing a training course run by UN Police. This cannot happen without the rule of law. The rule of law refers to a principle of governance in which all persons, public and private institutions, including the State itself, are accountable to laws that are consistent with international human rights norms and standards.

Justice is a vital component of the rule of law. At the international level, the most striking development over the past decade has occurred in the area of international criminal justice. The International Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda established by the Security Council in and respectively marked the first generation of tribunals since the International Military Tribunal established in Nuremberg.

They demonstrated the collective will not to allow grave violations of international law to go unpunished. Many of the poorest countries need investments to train and employ qualified personnel to manage democratic institutions that are vital to upholding the rule of law. In addition, good governance requires public participation in the political process. This helps guarantee that governments will be held accountable for their actions.

The last decade has witnessed substantial progress for democratic governance. Today more Governments have been chosen by competitive elections than at any time in history. In addition, in alone, over 50 million registered voters had the chance to participate in elections and referendums overseen by United Nations peacekeeping missions. This symbolizes important gains in human rights, freedom and choice. Competitive multi-party elections are essential for empowering the poor and for building lasting peace settlements.

It is responsible for coordinating the development mandates of 14 UN specialized agencies and five regional commissions. In addition, ECOSOC consults with academics, business representatives and more than 2, registered non-governmental organizations. Lack of freedom to buy enough food, have enough medicine, opportunity to go to school, also can be not to have freedom. Richness of human life—well-being: what people often fail to realize is that development is about having the opportunity and freedom to develop our abilities to their fullest extent.

Development cannot occur without the freedom from misery, hunger, illiteracy and disease. People who live in extreme poverty lack choices. Having a decent standard of living gives us the means to pursue our desires and dreams. Human rights come into play when we acknowledge that everyone should have the same opportunities to develop their abilities to the fullest extent.

Development ceases to move forward when violent conflict erupts, human rights are violated, or the rule of law is disregarded. Just as development can be negatively impacted by conflict, the lack of development can also lead to war. The strong link between human rights and development has figured prominently in United Nations deliberations for more than half a century.

In parallel, the growing economic influence of China through both investments and loans in many parts of Africa, Asia and Latin America may be an important part of this equation. Not all the evidence is negative with regards to elections.

Despite the increasing pressures that democratic elections face globally, the pandemic offered marked and somewhat surprising proof of their resilience. An initial period of postponed elections after the onset of the pandemic was followed by a period of quick learning and adaptation that allowed many democracies to successfully hold elections.

In , during the pandemic between February and December 82 out of scheduled elections at all levels Out of those postponed, 63 As Figure 14 shows, postponement decreased as countries and EMBs learned to hold elections in challenging conditions.

There were some notable challenges. For incumbents with authoritarian mindsets, holding elections during a legal state of exception provided an opportunity to use health and safety measures to sideline and silence political opponents, civil society, critical media and human rights advocates. While SVAs became a promising tool for many countries to deal with the challenge of holding elections during the pandemic, they often add significant costs, impose the need to update inadequate legal frameworks and ignite political controversies around possible risks to electoral integrity.

SVAs are designed to expand voting opportunities and to facilitate the principle of universal suffrage; they constitute alternatives to casting a ballot in person on election day at a polling station. SVAs make voting more accessible for individuals, and this acquired special relevance during the Covid pandemic. There are four types of SVAs, as follows:. Other challenges included difficulty in conducting electoral observation, due to travel and movement restrictions and health concerns, along with difficulties in observing new voting methods and procedures put in place to ensure the safety of voters.

As a result, a number of organizations conducting election monitoring including the Organization of American States, the Carter Center and the OSCE launched remote and hybrid expert missions, with smaller groups of observers on the ground. This has also placed greater importance on local CSOs conducting observation, with international bodies relying on them to complement their work. In addition, voter turnout in most countries has dropped during the pandemic.

From the beginning of the pandemic to the end of June , voter turnout declined in 63 per cent of countries 53 out of 84 countries that held national elections and referendums in comparison with their — average. The Covid pandemic sparked significant electoral innovation, and many electoral management bodies EMBs adapted their logistics, planning and materials to ensure the health and safety of voters.

The Republic of Korea and Mexico provide two good examples of this trend. The Republic of Korea was one of the first countries to decide to go ahead with its scheduled election in the early stages of the pandemic. The EMB facilitated early voting, extended home voting provisions to Covid patients in hospitals and those in self-isolation, and instituted safety and hygiene measures in polling stations.

Worth highlighting is the use of augmented reality AR technology—the enhancement of real-world objects through electronic devices—for virtual election campaigning. Candidates ran eye-catching campaigns with three-dimensional leaflets and virtual spaces. These measures guaranteed the safety of voters and resulted in an overall turnout of 66 per cent, the highest rate in a parliamentary election since Mexico went to the polls on 6 June to elect 21, representatives at all levels.

The National Electoral Institute INE issued a specific Covid protocol to keep voters safe in the ,plus polling stations established nationwide. Some of the actions undertaken included: mandatory use of face masks, signs and marks for keeping social distancing, hand sanitizing gel upon arriving at polling stations, disinfection of surfaces every two hours, allowing voters to bring their own crayon or pen to mark the ballot and only allowing two voters at a time inside the polling station.

The turnout for this election stood at EMBs around the world have been able to keep voters safe during the Covid pandemic. This has also been the case during other health emergencies, such as the Ebola epidemic in Liberia in and the Spanish influenza in — This dynamic shows that an epidemic should not be used as an excuse to cancel the holding of elections and deny citizens their right to elect and remove their representatives.

Generally speaking, these pandemic years have been marked by examples of electoral resilience. Out of all elections held on time between February and September , 73 per cent of them were in democracies. Although there was a decrease in voter turnout in the majority of national elections, 31 countries actually saw an increase in voter turnout during the pandemic—10 with an increase of more than 10 per cent.

Key ingredients for successful elections in a context of pandemic-related postponements were trust, multiparty consensus and inclusive decision-making. In Finland and New Zealand, transparent and inclusive decisions contributed to less controversial changes to timelines and to rules and regulations for proceeding with elections.

In the Republic of Korea, well-planned election administration and the adoption of safety measures Box 6 led to an increase in turnout of over 13 per cent compared with previous elections. New remote and digital practices are likely to last beyond the pandemic, as they also respond to broader societal and demographic changes, including increasing migration flows and voter mobility. Political parties around the world also used innovations to run campaigns and engage with constituents throughout the pandemic.

In the United States, parties held virtual party conventions before adopting non-traditional rallies, such as drive-in events and those held at airports. More analysis on the electoral lessons learned from the pandemic for future crises can be found in the GSoD thematic paper on elections. Despite overall improvement in all regions of the world between and Figure 15 , since , and for the fifth consecutive year, the number of countries with declines in the Free Political Parties subattribute exceeds those with improvements—no surprise, given the global rise in democratic backsliding and a rise in authoritarian-leaning movements and parties around the world during that time Figure Parties have also updated the way they understand membership, as seen in countries as diverse as France, India and Senegal.

Other parties, such as the Democratic Alliance in South Africa, have created a programme of online ambassadors to adapt party messages to the online sphere. The programmes have engaged a number of party activists with influence on social media, to explain party policies and positions online.

Perhaps in response to these new movements, many parties have harnessed technology to help them become more inclusive, including applications for crowdfunding and citizen engagement. In India, given the rapid increase in smartphone usage among lower- and middle-income voters, the Aam Aadmi Party developed a mobile app that facilitates direct donations.

The pandemic pushed parties even further to innovate in their offline activities but also to take the party further online. The elections in the Republic of Korea were a clear example of a traditionally in-person political campaign moving largely online. However, not all countries have been experiencing the shrinking of space for fair, multiparty competition.

In Armenia, mass anti-government protests led to the resignation of Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan, who failed to maintain his pledge to refrain from extending his rule. Since then, the electoral playing field is more levelled and opposition parties have more space to organize and campaign more freely. Elections and political parties are key facilitators of social and economic improvement. A number of studies have shown a positive relation between having a representative government and key welfare indicators, ranging from having adequate healthcare to the prevention of disasters.

Overall, it measures the fair and equal access to justice, the extent to which civil liberties such as freedom of expression or movement are respected, and the extent to which countries are offering their citizens basic welfare and political equality.

The difficulty has been compounded by a surge of protests, which have been sparked by dissatisfaction with pandemic responses but also by other long-unresolved grievances and persistent inequalities. Some of these declines predate the pandemic, and certain governments have used the Covid outbreak to justify the continuation of restrictions unrelated to the virus.

In fact, Freedom of Expression was the aspect of democracy most at risk prior to the outbreak of the pandemic. Measures that restrict this right have been the most disproportionate, when compared with other limitations on rights, and they are more likely to persist after the pandemic is over see Box 8.

In total, 38 countries have used new laws or mandates to criminalize disinformation and 18 countries have used existing laws; 38 countries have made disinformation on Covid an imprisonable offence. In at least 10 countries, the new laws are permanent and will last beyond the pandemic and risk causing long-term damage to freedom of expression in those countries.

In addition, 18 countries imposed fines for the spread of disinformation on Covid, of which 9 are democracies, including Albania , Bulgaria , Mongolia and the backsliding Philippines. In the Philippines, the fines are the highest—at USD 20, Restrictions on freedom of expression include the use of legislation to silence critical voices, the censorship of and restrictions on access to certain kinds of information, and attacks on journalists.

These victims have been targeted for disseminating data, research and information, as well as for lodging complaints on the handling of the pandemic or reporting on the virus. In September , for example, Human Rights Watch raised concerns when Sudanese artists were imprisoned and fined for chanting pro-democracy slogans at a police station.

While the large majority of concerning developments related to Freedom of Expression have occurred in non-democratic regimes that were already weak prior to the pandemic, 15 democracies have experienced concerning developments during the pandemic. The Global Monitor also shows that the Asia and the Pacific region has been particularly hard hit. One of the most striking examples is that of Hong Kong, where new security legislation, widely criticized as curtailing freedom of speech and assembly, was introduced in June Under the new legislation, trials can be held in secret and without a jury, and cases can also be taken over by mainland authorities.

This context has been made worse by an embattled independent press, which has long faced pressure from the growth of social media and has more recently struggled to survive the economic impact of the pandemic see Section 5. Freedom of expression is dependent upon the access to information, and democracies have done well in this regard. In contrast, 77 per cent of authoritarian regimes provide the public with this kind of resource.

His government restricted the media from publishing Covid content without permission, and many Tanzanians were afraid to speak out due to the fear of repercussions. Critics accused the government of a cover-up, especially after evidence of night-time burials with attendants in protective gear came to light. Democracies have not gone unscathed.

In the USA and Poland, for example, there were reports of doctors and other medical staff who had been instructed not to speak with journalists. In some cases, those who flouted this order lost their jobs. Learning from the MERS and SARS epidemics, some countries have revised their legislation to strengthen the right to information during a public health emergency e. A number of countries provide good examples of open government, posting and regularly updating information about the spread of infections, the number of deaths from Covid and up-to-date information about restrictions and vaccinations to keep citizens informed.

Many authorities have also made efforts to reach people in different languages. Ensuring transparent access to reliable Covidrelated information is key to preventing the spread of disinformation. In Taiwan, the government used viral memes, cartoons, animal mascots and other humorous digital campaigns to communicate with the public on the virus.

South Africa developed a hotline to report false information, and Taiwan and the United Kingdom opened specialized units to identify and respond to disinformation. Web-based and app-based anti-disinformation games and fact-checking sites have also been developed to debunk inaccurate content and help people navigate facts and disinformation on the virus. WHO launched a multilingual messaging service with WhatsApp to answer questions. And supporting official efforts, the NGO Taiwan FactCheck Center has been cooperating with social media platforms nationally to verify pandemic-related information posted online, as well as educate the public in identifying and reporting fake news.

Disinformation has become a defining issue of politics in our times. The term is often used broadly to encompass the artificial and inauthentic manipulation of public opinion online, through multiple techniques including false or misleading information.

It has always existed, but social media and online communications have exponentially amplified its impact and reach. Disinformation campaigns can be international in scope, with the power to impact public opinion, freedom of thought, the right to privacy and the right to democratic participation.

This has allowed formerly fringe ideas and political forces to come to the forefront of the political debate, and galvanized polarizing rhetoric. Social media is designed to prioritize any content that boosts engagement, so companies gather more behavioural data to target their ads more accurately. When this logic is applied to political debate, it is confrontation and affective polarization, rather than compromise and dialogue, that fuel engagement.

Populist, nativist, illiberal and authoritarian leaders thrive in such scenarios, which can also sometimes push democratic forces to use similar polarizing and confrontational narratives and techniques to maintain their voices online. This presence is fundamental, as users increasingly use online platforms as their main source of information. In some countries, including Indonesia, Nigeria and Peru, nearly 80 per cent of the population use their smartphone as their main news device.

Disinformation attacks common political knowledge—those ideas and beliefs that are shared by the majority and that maintain the cohesion of political systems, such as the integrity of the electoral process or the separation of powers. An example of an attack on common political knowledge that threatens the quality of democracy can be found in the wave of disinformation targeting vote-counting in the USA or Peruvian presidential elections.

This has significantly damaged trust in elections, even if both elections were largely free and fair. Regulation has advanced significantly in recent years, both from social media platforms themselves and from governments.

Social media platforms have implemented several self-regulating measures and invested a significant amount of resources in fighting political disinformation. Today, Google and Twitter basically ban paid political advertisements and Facebook has created a wide array of tools that increase the transparency of political ads , among other things. Some of the measures taken by Facebook and Twitter during the US presidential elections are also proof of this.

On the government side, although upcoming laws such as the Digital Service Act in the EU are praiseworthy, many governments are taking advantage of regulations to restrict freedom of expression and media integrity. This has been exacerbated during the pandemic. In Nicaragua, for instance, journalists have been harassed under the Cyber Crimes Law, approved by parliament in December Political disinformation will never disappear, but regulation should address the behaviours and means that make it possible.

Addressing the way disinformation operations are financed by political parties and candidates will be a start and will in parallel reduce the undue influence of money in politics. Other actions should aim to change behaviour by political actors and by the media, so that they foster non-polarizing narratives. Action should also focus on applying the open government principles to fight disinformation and to increase media literacy among citizens.

Articles 21 and 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantee everyone the right to peaceful assembly and the right to freedom of association with others, including through trade unions. As the pandemic has ravaged the world, it is clear that governments have struggled to protect public health while continuing to maintain respect for these rights.

In fact, 96 per cent of countries placed some form of restriction on the freedoms of association and assembly since the start of the pandemic, including bans on the size or the holding of public gatherings. Many restrictions have appeared to serve political purposes. In Sri Lanka, the government banned an annual memorial of victims of the civil war that takes place in the northeast of the country, where commemorations tend to be for former rebel soldiers.

But people have also been driven to protest and voice their concerns, despite the restrictions. Protests have continued in 82 per cent of countries , despite the pandemic. Pandemic-related protests have broken out over lockdown measures, demands for better safety measures for frontline workers, economic and financial aid for struggling businesses, and perceived government mismanagement of the pandemic. In some cases, pandemic-related concerns have intertwined with pre-existing issues see Chapter 7 on Participatory Engagement for more details.

As they have sought to contain the spread of the virus within and outside their borders, governments have also found it necessary to curb freedom of movement. In fact, almost all countries in the world covered by the GSoD Indices, including high-performing democracies, have imposed some kind of restriction on domestic and foreign movement and the right to worship. More than half of all countries in the world 55 per cent implemented a national lockdown at some point.

As a result, freedom of movement has been severely impacted during the pandemic in all democracies. In a related development, at least countries 82 per cent placed some restrictions on freedom of religion during the pandemic, either banning religious gatherings or restricting their size and duration.

By August , restrictions on worship remained in place in 68 countries 41 per cent. In democracies, these measures have been implemented in proportion to the health threat and imposed within democratically approved legal frameworks. In some cases, however, initially temporary measures have remained in place or been reimposed to respond to subsequent waves of the pandemic, thereby limiting democratic freedoms for much longer than originally envisaged.

In most cases, this has gone on for more than a year. As of August , restrictions on movement remained in place in countries 98 per cent , although vaccination campaigns are slowly leading to a reopening of societies. Restrictions on movement between countries have not always been seen to be equally or fairly applied.

Allegations of racism have also been levelled against Australia, which imposed a ban on Australians of Indian descent being allowed back home. In the early phase of the pandemic, many governments invoked a legal state of exception namely, a state of emergency or a state of disaster , giving themselves often with the cooperation of the legislature additional powers to introduce regulations and big spending programmes to deal with the effects of the pandemic.

In this context, 69 countries have made violating Covid regulations an imprisonable offence. Two-thirds of the countries passing laws of this nature 67 per cent are democracies, with 12 from the EU. The weak democracy Albania and the mid-range performing democracy of Mexico top the list of countries with the longest prison sentences for breaking pandemic restrictions 15 and 12 years respectively. These restrictions can take on undemocratic characteristics.

For example, excessive use of force in enforcing restrictions violates democratic norms; this has alarmingly occurred in 59 per cent of countries 97 in the world during the pandemic, including 54 democracies. For example, in Zambia , arbitrary detentions, together with intimidation tactics and harassment, have been used by the police to enforce the movement restrictions imposed, in an effort to curb the Covid pandemic.

More than 20 per cent of countries across all regions have made use of the military in some respect to support enforcement of Covid measures. This heightens the risk of unchecked excessive force and the normalization of increasingly militarized civil life after the pandemic.

Military enforcement throughout the pandemic has been most commonly observed in Latin America 39 per cent of countries , the Middle East 35 per cent and Asia and the Pacific 25 per cent. Globally, 42 per cent of countries have used either voluntary or compulsory contact tracing apps or sharing of mobile data as part of their pandemic response.

While these approaches have proven effective in curbing the spread of the virus, they also pose new challenges to personal integrity and data protection, particularly in countries that lack adequate legislative frameworks. There is also a risk that the storage of personal data can be used for political purposes after the pandemic is over. Of particular concern are the eight non-democratic regimes Azerbaijan , Bahrain , China , Kazakhstan , Qatar , Singapore , Thailand and Turkey that have made these apps mandatory, countering good practice guidelines.

There is wide variation across countries in the types of emergency law response that are available for governments. In some cases, the constitution defines several levels of emergency law response Spain has a state of alarm, a state of exception and a state of siege , while in other countries the only emergency law response available is designed for use during a war or insurrection as in Latvia.

Finally, some countries do not have a constitutional avenue for an emergency law response by the central government but do provide a statutory framework as in the USA. The GSoD thematic paper on emergency law responses and Covid highlights the ways in which the pandemic has exposed the shortcomings in how many constitutions regulate extraordinary situations.

In a world in which climate change increases the probability of natural disasters, clear legal frameworks with effective oversight mechanisms for emergencies should be a high priority for legal reform in many countries. Emergency laws do not necessarily allow for derogation of rights. In the Spanish case, the lowest level of emergency law response the State of Alarm declared in March was later found to be in violation of the Constitution because the government used that emergency law response to implement measures that had the effect of suspending rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Emergency laws are also not solely within the purview of the executive. In fact, most frameworks require the legislature to review and approve executive action within a specified timeframe. In Fiji, the period is 24 hours, while in Botswana, approval is required within 7 or 21 days depending on specified circumstances.

Sometimes, the mechanism varies depending on the type of emergency declared. An additional check on possible rights restrictions can be found in international and regional human rights covenants, many of which provide for derogation of rights during emergencies and which often require signatory states to provide an official notification of this action.

This provides an added layer of accountability for governments that determine that the pandemic requires such a robust response. However, the GSoD thematic paper on emergency law responses and Covid notes that compliance with the notification obligation has not been universal, and that the safeguards in this area are inadequate. The relationship between the type of emergency law response used in a country whether constitutional or legislated , and potential impacts on the state of democracy is complex and context specific.

Two guiding considerations enable nuanced judgements in individual cases. First, do the emergency law responses follow the substantive and procedural requirements of national and to whatever extent it is relevant international law? Second, are the measures necessary, and if so have they been implemented in a proportional way? These questions allow for a nuanced analysis of the extent to which restrictions on or indeed clear violations of fundamental rights may still be consonant with democracy.

The fight for gender equality was slow-going even before the pandemic, but the consequences of the virus have made progress even harder. Lockdowns have increased gender-based violence in many countries. In Cyprus and Singapore, for example, helplines have registered an increase in calls by 30 per cent and 33 per cent, respectively.

In Argentina, emergency calls for domestic violence cases increased by 25 per cent after the lockdown started. Moreover, 40 per cent of all employed women work in hard-hit sectors retail, food service and entertainment , compared with 37 per cent of men. Moreover, women have been under-represented in leadership and expert groups managing the Covid crisis and have had limited opportunities to make their voices heard in the policy responses to the pandemic.

Global female parliamentary representation remains low at approximately 26 per cent of total seats in national legislatures. Only three legislatures in the world Cuba, Rwanda and the United Arab Emirates are made up of more than 50 per cent women, and none of them are democracies. In , there are still countries in the world with no women legislators Micronesia, Papua New Guinea and Vanuatu. Female representation in other spheres of public life and in the private sector globally is even lower, with only 21 per cent of women in the executive branch and only 5 per cent of corporate boards chaired by women.

In addition to globally low levels of gender equality being exacerbated by pandemic effects, gender equality is also threatened by rising authoritarianism, with political leaders increasingly using gender as a weapon as part of their backsliding strategies. Hungary did so in At the same time, despite the backlash faced by women in many countries, the pandemic years of and have shown how much female leadership matters. Women have been at the forefront of the pandemic response, representing 70 per cent of healthcare workers.

Women have also been leading lights of the pro-democracy movements that have developed in Belarus and Myanmar during the pandemic years of and , showing the strength of female leadership for bringing about societal change, even in the face of violent repression. In Chile, elections for the Constituent Assembly held in May led to more women than men elected in certain districts, forcing a situation in which additional men had to be given seats to respect the parity principle.

At the local level, the state of Victoria in Australia saw a rise in female representation in local council elections in October , despite the constraints imposed by the pandemic. Victoria is now one of the few local governments in the world that is close to gender parity, with In Nepal, mayors and deputy mayors have been key actors in ensuring that pandemic-related interventions are both gender sensitive and inclusive.

Social group equality has also been severely affected by the pandemic, as vulnerable groups—such as children, migrants, disabled people, and ethnic, sexual and religious minorities—have faced discrimination in the enforcement of Covid regulations and access to healthcare across the world. First, the impact of the pandemic has deepened long-existing economic inequalities throughout the globe.

This divergence is also evident within countries, as industries such as tourism and hospitality have suffered while sectors such as pharmaceuticals and networking technology have boomed. Wealthier people and nations may emerge from the pandemic better off than they were before, while the more disadvantaged bear the economic brunt. There are also important divides between different ethnic and racial groups within countries.

A study in England and Wales found that men and women of black African heritage had the highest death rates from Covid—around two times higher than their white counterparts. In many of these cases, these inequalities are long-standing; the context of the pandemic, however, has refocused attention on them.

In India, the government has used laws against cow slaughter and anti-conversion to target Muslims, while sedition and counter-terrorism laws have been used to target human rights defenders, student activists, academics, opposition members and other critics. Deepening polarization has also been evident in Sri Lanka, where the government imposed a ban on burials, saying that virus-infected bodies could infect groundwater.

Sexual minority groups have also been targeted. It measures the extent to which the parliament oversees the executive, as well as whether the courts are independent, and whether media is diverse and critical of the government without being penalized for it. Given the rise in authoritarianism, it is unsurprising that global progress towards better checks on government is not advancing more quickly. At a high level of aggregation, this attribute stalled around , and there have been slight declines at the regional level in the Middle East and in Europe.

The individual countries that have experienced declines between and are Benin, Brazil, Poland and Yemen. Checks on Government is a key attribute indicative of democratic backsliding, and so it is not surprising to see that two of those countries Brazil and Poland have been identified in this report as backsliding democracies, while Benin lost its democratic status in During the same period, statistically significant gains were made in Armenia, Ecuador, the Gambia, the Republic of Korea, Thailand and Uzbekistan.

Checks on government are vitally linked to the delivery of government services. In many countries, the judiciary plays an important role in ensuring that citizens receive from the government the goods and services to which they are legally entitled. Landmark cases in countries including Brazil, Colombia, India and South Africa have required governments to take positive steps to fulfil promises made by the law.

An effective parliament, too, is vital to service delivery for citizens, as members of the legislature can ensure that the people they represent receive timely and adequate services from government agencies. One area of checks on government where there has been growth and innovation in recent years is in the openness and transparency of government data.

In this way, journalists, CSOs and citizens can access information about the government without undue delays, redaction or bureaucratic hurdles. As the impacts of climate change are increasingly being felt around the world, open government data will be more necessary than ever.

This will enable both checks against government overreach including climate mitigation strategies that violate fundamental rights , and accountability in areas where governments have not lived up to their promises. The number of countries with weakening Judicial Independence started to rise in and has reached and remained at an all-time historic high since then, including during the first pandemic year of Figure Such weakening judicial independence is often the result of attempts to politicize judicial institutions and weaken the rule of law, both in weak democracies and as part of democratic backsliding processes.

Political leaders who want to concentrate power in the hands of their parties often seek to implement reforms that allow them to rule with only minimal checks. Disempowering or capturing the judiciary is a key part of those attempts see, for example, rhetorical and institutional attacks on the judiciary in Poland and Brazil.

However, there are also many countries that have experienced significant advances in Judicial Independence since , an increase that has continued during the pandemic year of Figure Judicial institutions have played a crucial role in containing executive overreach during the pandemic, both in the invocation and extension of states of emergency, and in the application of restrictions.

Among the most problematic of cases is Poland. The PiS Government has gradually chipped away at the independence of the judiciary since , changing the rules governing several courts in a manner that is designed to give the ruling party more opportunities to appoint judges, and more control over who those judges will be. During the pandemic, several Latin American countries have been rocked by conflicts between judicial institutions, parliaments and government.

In the weak democracy of Guatemala, for example, conflicts between the legislature, the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Court and the Attorney General have undermined the credibility of judicial institutions. The conflicts have been exacerbated during the pandemic, positioning Guatemala on the verge of a constitutional crisis, as the legislature has sought variously to impeach justices of the Constitutional Court, to prevent their appointment, and to remove their immunity from civil litigation.

In particular, litigation initiated by the legislature against sitting justices carries the risk of a constitutional crisis. These conflicts have severely undermined the capacity of the judiciary to combat corruption, even as the country ranks among the top 25 per cent of countries with the highest levels of corruption in the world. Even high-performing democracies in Western Europe have suffered challenges to ensuring judicial independence during the pandemic, although not as a result of it.

In Spain, the government initially passed but then withdrew a bill that would have made the appointments process for judges easier and subject to less scrutiny. The proposal highlights the ways in which high-performing democracies must be vigilant to maintain judicial independence.

Judicial institutions, however, have also successfully resisted executive influence. Fresh elections were free of irregularities in June , with a win for opposition parties. In Lesotho, the Constitutional Court ordered the reopening of parliament, after the Prime Minister ordered a three-month closure because of the pandemic. Parliamentary strength has been improving in several countries since , with new democracies, such as Armenia and the Gambia, as well as mid-range performing democracies, such as the Republic of Korea and Ukraine, serving as examples Box 12 of how legislatures can improve their performance.

With the onset of the pandemic, the critical role of parliaments in sustaining democratic models of governance quickly became clear. In countries where ruling parties had a history of entrenching their parliamentary influence in the pre-pandemic period, parliaments were muted. Ruling-party majorities often self-divested from systematic and rigorous oversight and meaningful public deliberation on measures to address the pandemic see, for example, in Hungary, India and South Africa.

During the first pandemic year of , the number of countries with weakened parliaments increased Figure A combination of Ukrainian political will and international support has enabled the country to make significant advances. After the — revolution in Ukraine, it became apparent that the Verkhovna Rada—its parliament—was ready for reform that would transform the institution and adapt it to European standards.

Between September and February , a Needs Assessment Mission from the European Parliament worked closely with the Ukrainian Parliament and developed a roadmap for internal reform and capacity-building. It included experts who would assist in a wide range of issues, from developing a parliamentary educational programme to drafting laws on parliamentary public services and introducing digital tools in the legislative process.

The former enabled a better flow of information from officials, and the latter helped the Secretariat of the parliament organize legislative support services in a more efficient manner. When the pandemic hit the country, the parliament maintained stability and—through political consensus—passed laws to curb Covid It also managed to maintain progress in the fight against corruption, particularly through the work of the National Agency for Prevention of Corruption and the e-declaration system an anti-corruption innovation introduced in Although there has been a great deal of progress in recent years, Ukraine faces many challenges as it seeks to make its parliament more effective.

One such hurdle is a parliamentary-presidential form of government that tends to give the president more power than the parliament in many situations. Further capacity-building in the parliament will have to take place within a political context that has significant internal institutional challenges and pressing external threats. In the initial phase of the pandemic, parliaments were sidelined in many countries, both in the approval of emergency measures and in their implementation, as increased powers were invested in the executives in order to swiftly respond to the pandemic.

This move to invoke emergency law responses, in combination with an initial disruption to parliamentary activities due to risk of infection, may have temporarily weakened parliamentary powers and oversight in some countries. However, the majority of those cases were in non-democratic regimes. For additional analysis on emergency responses during the Covid pandemic and their implications for democracy, see.

Most parliaments, however, have continued to carry out their functions during the pandemic through virtual or adapted forms of interaction. In a study of emergency law responses across countries up to July , 64 per cent had involved the legislature in the legal response to the pandemic.

Some parliaments have enabled proportionate attendance and voting according to party group size, so that activity could continue on a multiparty basis, without crowded plenary and committee rooms Australia. Others have allowed notices of motions to be submitted electronically, permitted proxy votes, and allowed the electronic submission of questions New Zealand.

These new routines have allowed parliaments to play more active roles, as the pandemic has unfolded, in both the debate and approval of economic packages, in the extension of states of emergencies and in the scrutiny of government handling of the pandemic. Beyond the importance of parliamentary oversight of emergency law responses identified above, parliaments have a vital role to play in oversight of new spending measures and budgetary exceptions that have been part of many national pandemic responses.

But parliaments also have a positive function in innovating and finding solutions. Collaboration across government is likely to lead to better outcomes than a centralized response with control focused in the executive branch.

Media Integrity measures the extent to which the media: a are free from government control; and b include a diversity of opinions, including criticism of the government. Globally, Media Integrity is in decline. For the past eight years, the number of countries in which the subattribute has registered significant declines has been higher than the number of countries showing improvements. Part of the continuous decline in Media Integrity globally is related to an intractable crisis in traditional media, anchored in declining advertising revenue, increasing media ownership concentration, the rise of free-to-access online media, the pre-eminent role of social media debates in setting the agenda, and the proliferation of disinformation.

These factors have upended the global media landscape, rendered many media outlets unsustainable and, most importantly, dwindled public trust in media. Such a scenario creates fertile ground for media repression. In India, for instance, the capacity of media to report in Kashmir has been severely restricted due to the ongoing Internet disruption. In Nicaragua, the only remaining printed newspaper critical of the regime was raided by police in August In Slovenia, the government is increasing its efforts to undermine critical media, and some journalists have reported that it is no longer a safe haven.

As a result, there has been a rise in self-censorship, further decreasing the ability of the public to access information. Other examples include widespread arrests and harassment of journalists reporting on the pandemic, such as in Bangladesh , Nicaragua or Tanzania. Despite the overall negative trend, 13 countries recorded significant improvements in Media Integrity, including some weak democracies, which constitute 30 per cent of the improvers.

In the Gambia, President Adama Barrow has begun to fulfil his promise of developing a freer media. For example, several privately owned radio and TV stations have been created, ending the state monopoly in the media. In July , the government granted media outlets a subsidy of about USD 30, to help them through the pandemic-induced financial crisis. In the midst of what appeared to be a very bad year for the media in many countries, this is a modest example of important support for the free press.

Its sustainability, however, will depend on its ability to regain financial independence. When it is able to function effectively, the media will be a tool to promote accountability and transparency, a forum for society, and in some cases an agenda-setter that highlights social problems and supports democracy and democratic efforts. Impartial Administration is the aggregate of two subattributes: Absence of Corruption and Predictable Enforcement. It measures the extent to which the state is free from corruption, and whether the enforcement of public authority is predictable.

In keeping with the orientation of the other aspects in the GSoD Indices, a high score in Absence of Corruption denotes less corruption. Impartial Administration is a key deliverable for democracy, partly because it deals with the aspects of government that individuals engage with most frequently—regulations and bureaucracy.

Corruption is one of the most intractable problems in governance. In fact, the GSoD Indices show that levels of corruption and predictable enforcement have remained largely stagnant globally over the past four decades. There is some regional variation, with North America and Europe consistently performing well, and Africa and the Middle East performing poorly. In a global survey on experiences with corruption, Transparency International found that one in four respondents to their global corruption survey had paid a bribe to a public official in the previous 12 months.

Although new digital technologies have the power to increase transparency and curtail opportunities for corruption, they have also posed new challenges in the fight against corruption. Cryptocurrencies, blockchain, big-data analytics and artificial intelligence have opened up avenues for new forms of digital corruption, challenging regulatory systems and anti-corruption efforts. Such technologies are also reportedly used by organized crime networks for money laundering. As the pandemic has ravaged the world and thrown light on systemic inequality, it has perhaps never been clearer that impartial administrations, free from corruption and with the capacity to predictably enforce public policies, are key not only to democratic progress, but also to basic human welfare.

Corruption undermines trust in democracy as a form of government, fuels civic discontent and diverts scarce resources for basic welfare away from those in need. It also provides a fertile ground for extremist movements to grow. Covidrelated corruption can severely undermine pandemic measures and hinder recovery efforts. Indeed, many of the protests across the world, prior to and during the pandemic, have been fuelled by citizen frustration about wide-scale government corruption e.

Bulgaria, Haiti, Iraq, Lebanon and Tunisia. Corruption poses a threat to the legitimacy of both democracies and non-democracies. Furthermore, a number of democracies battle high levels of corruption 18 per cent of democracies. However, democratic systems of government are overall better at tackling corruption than non-democratic governments.

Authoritarian and hybrid regimes are more prone to corruption than democracies. Three-quarters 75 per cent of authoritarian regimes have high levels of corruption, as do 57 per cent of hybrid regimes. No single authoritarian regime and only one hybrid regime Singapore has low levels of corruption, demonstrating that Singapore constitutes the exception rather than the rule.

A worrisome trend in the last few years has been the elimination or neutralization of public entities fighting against corruption, usually because of their effectiveness. In countries as diverse as Guatemala and Indonesia, anti-corruption agencies have been either eliminated or placed under severe restrictions.

In Guatemala, a UN-backed successful anti-corruption commission was dismantled in , after having prosecuted many high-level corruption cases. Moreover, the top anti-corruption prosecutor of the country was dismissed in The pandemic has unfortunately also opened up new avenues for corruption, both in the purchase of healthcare supplies to fight the virus, and, more recently, in the purchase and distribution of vaccines.

Transparency International estimates that, in the health sector, around 7 per cent of procurement is lost to corruption. Examples include weak backsliding democracies, such as Brazil—where investigations for misappropriation of funds are ongoing in all 27 states. Even high-performing democracies, such as Germany, have not been spared. A scandal broke there in March , when it became apparent that two politicians had received kickbacks for brokering mask deals.

For the purposes of this report, civic space is defined as the space in which formal and informal CSOs engage, together with other actors e. Around the world, civil society has continued to play various important roles throughout the pandemic, acting to give voice to public sentiment and to provide assistance in the face of pandemic lockdowns and other restrictions. CSOs have helped organize some of the protests around the world, which have reflected frustration with current societal models and the perceived inability of traditional political parties to tackle societal challenges.

Colombia, Cuba, Iraq, Lebanon, South Africa and Tunisia , as well as diverse other concerns unrelated to the pandemic, such as racial discrimination the Black Lives Matter movement or agricultural prices in India. In , mass protests related to the pandemic and other political issues have also affected a wide array of other countries, including Australia, Colombia, Cuba, France, Mongolia, Myanmar, Peru, Russia, Sri Lanka and Uganda.

CSOs have provided essential food, medical supplies and safe spaces to vulnerable sections of the population. They have reached marginalized and non-native speakers with reliable information on Covid CSOs have also helped limit the spread of disinformation in ways that do not undermine freedom of expression. There are numerous examples of CSOs and civil society networks coming together to debunk misinformation to help journalists provide accurate coverage of the pandemic, including the LatamChequea network and Africa Check.

Democracy 4 pillars of investing forex metal detector

The year has seen the world besieged by a pandemic that has claimed millions of lives.

Alpari forex malaysia currency These examples are evidence of a trend that began inmarked by a global increase of electoral boycotts and a decline in the number of countries where all parties accept electoral results. In particular, litigation initiated by the legislature against sitting justices carries the risk of a constitutional crisis. China is an authoritarian regime in which there are no expectations of a right to privacy or control over personal data. Since the Chinese conduct most of their daily activities online, such as banking, shopping and paying for services, there are millions of data points that can be attached to each citizen, shaping a very detailed profile of every person living in the country. Elaine C. In Nicaragua, President Daniel Ortega has severely repressed opposition candidates, independent journalists and civil society activists ahead of the elections.
New york stock exchange building architecture in blender How much of my savings should i invest in stocks
Magnus investment partners 229
Comment about forex Government institutions, in close consultation with civil society, must take the lead in recrafting social contracts. Landmark cases in countries including Brazil, Colombia, India and South Africa have required governments to take positive steps to fulfil promises made by the law. Many of the poorest countries need investments to train and employ qualified personnel to manage democratic institutions that are vital to upholding the rule of law. Since its founding inthe UN has been a witness and catalyst to an extraordinary transition in global relations. With this aim, Democracy 4 pillars of investing solutions are designed to improve the regulatory environment for foreign and domestic firms along all phases of the investment and business lifecycle. In addition, voter turnout link most countries has dropped during the pandemic.
Office of financial research Hungary, Poland, Turkey. The pandemic has made it easier to justify this behaviour, including the politicization of judiciaries, the manipulation of media, restrictions on civil liberties and minority rights, and the weakening of civil society. The fate of democracy and that of the private sector are inextricably linked, and private sector leaders have reasons of self-interest as well as principle to do what they can to strengthen democracy. The consequences could include an extended period of political and social instability, and an outbreak of mass violence. The Global Monitor provides monthly data on pandemic measures and their impact on democracy for countries in the world. Government institutions, in close consultation with civil society, must take the lead in recrafting social contracts democracy 4 pillars of investing multiple ways. The declines are most noted in Africa but are also pronounced in Latin America and Asia.
Democracy 4 pillars of investing Waclaw sierpinski fractals forex

Something is. rahsia jutawan forex didedahkan consider

democracy 4 pillars of investing

FOREX TRADING BY ELLIOTT

First of all, only available in. Desktop Hardware Firewall or On-Premises Choose for the warranty guidance in the. Now a new expire after a more complex dependencies. I'd choose Comodo many features that. If you are using direct connectivity from Fortinet's commitment a reseller Buy means that your.

From day to day, stock markets are unpredictable. They soar beyond all logic and plunge to unreasonable levels. Over decades and centuries, though, the direction is clear: Stocks go up. Stocks remain the investment of choice. From to , stocks averaged 9. The inflation-adjusted returns balance the safety of Treasury bills. Stocks are the most lucrative investment in the long run, but they can produce gut-wrenching losses.

William J. Bernstein is a retired neurologist and co-founder of Efficient Frontier Advisors, an investment management firm. He is the author of five books, including A Splendid Exchange. How would you like to use getAbstract? For myself For my company. Try it for free. Request a Demo. For yourself Discover your next favorite book with getAbstract. See prices. For your company Stay up-to-date with emerging trends in less time. Learn more. Students We're committed to helping nextgenleaders.

Due to rights restrictions, the audio file is currently unavailable. Listen to MP3 Audio Summary. Also available in:. Editorial Rating 8. The rating — what does it mean? Here's what the ratings mean: 10 — Brilliant. Qualities Applicable Qualities. Read on. My Highlights Select the sections that are relevant to you.

Your highlights will appear here. Are you sure you want to remove the highlight? Cancel Delete. Accordingly, Wikipedia defines it as a system where citizens are allowed to exercise their power by voting. All the above definitions clearly explains what democracy is about. The key point to note here is that democracy is a rule by the people.

That is, a government where every member of the country participates in political decision making. For further explanation of the meaning of democracy, i recommend that you watch the video below. Trust me, you will enjoy it. Basically, there are two major types of democracy namely; Direct Democracy and Indirect Democracy or representative democracy.

Direct democracy is a type of democracy where the people come directly to participate in the political decision making of the nation. Here, the opinion of each member of the nation is counted and taken into consideration when political decisions are made. On the other hand, Indirect or representative democracy is a type of democracy where the people elect their representatives into power to make political decisions on their behalf. In this type of democracy, election is a necessity because it is that way that the interest of the people can still be ensured.

Since democracy is a government by the people, there is hardly room for dictatorship and that is why many people love the system. Through this way, democracy is able to capture the dreams and aspirations of every member of the society and not the selfish desire of a particular dictator.

Another reason why democracy is deemed to be the best system of government is because, unlike other systems of government, it encourages popular participation in politics a lot. This is done either directly or through representatives elected by the people. Throughout history, there has never been any government that supports accountability and transparency as a democratic one.

Even till today, the most transparent governments in the world are usually democratic in nature. Democracy tries to carry everybody along and that is why the system is loved by many. Even when there is majority and minority in political decision making processes, democracy still provides and makes space for the minority. Below is an infographics showing the 7 essential pillars of democracy and a brief explanation of all of them.

Legitimacy simply means the acceptance and recognition of the power to govern given to the leaders. It is one of the major pillars of democracy because the absence of legitimacy means that the people did not legally assign political powers to their leaders to govern them.

Legitimacy cannot be achieved when there is no periodical elections, conducted to enable the people appoint their leaders. It should also be noted that the same way the people can Legitimately appoint their leaders, they can also legitimately remove whoever they want from power through impeachment or recall.

Separation of powers is another important pillar of democracy. It is the segmentation of government powers to sidestep the problem of dictatorship and tyrannical leadership. Usually, the segment of powers is between the legislature, executive and judicial pillars of the government. So, instead of bestowing all political powers on one person of group of people or allowing just one arm of government to perform all government functions, powers and functions will be shared between the arms.

In most cases, the legislature will perform the law making function, the judiciary will perform the interpretation function and the executive will execute the law. Also read: Cheapest universities to attend in Canada.

Democracy is unlike a monarchy where only persons from the lineage of the king or queen can rule. It is a system where everyone leads either directly or through representatives. For this reason, opinion polls and consultations are regular activities when political decisions are to be taken in a democratic nation.

Thorough research and debating are usually done within government representatives before government policies are reached or executed. An example of a country where this is seen is the Nigeria. Before the government takes any political move there is usually a deliberation of it in the house of assembly to ensure that it is for the best interest of the people.

Through period elections democracy is able to avoid dictatorship by leaders. Periodic elections is one of the tenets of democracy that cannot be overlooked. It is very important because it is the key pillar of democracy and also an important feature of a democratic system as well.

Think about it this way; a nation that claims to be practicing democracy can not be said to be a true democratic nation if there is no period election. The essence of democracy is to avoid arbitrary rules and one of the way to ensure that is through periodic elections. Also read: Major Characteristics of a good constitution. Checks and balances is a political theory and a very essential pillar of government. This theory posits that there should be a mutual oversight and limitation by the arms of government in order to prevent abuse of power.

I have already explained how separation of powers helps to foster democracy and fight against dictatorship in government. Now, the theory of checks of balances further helps to achieve that by allowing the arms of government to check the activities of each other. Another reason for the theory of checks and balances is to curb excesses of power by one arm of the government. Thus, the judiciary can check the activities of the legislature or executive to see whether they are both acting under their assigned constitutional powers.

In turn, the legislature can check the activities of others and the executive can also do the same. Also read: Differences between offer and invitation to treat in contract law. Rule of law simply means supremacy of the law. It posits that the law is above everybody in a political system and thus, no arm of government, agency or organization is supreme.

The theory of rule of law was propounded by A. V Dicey. It is one of the greatest features and tenets of democracy because the dreams and aspirants of the people are contained in the law. This therefore makes the law Supreme even above the government itself. It should be noted however that there are many factors that can actually limit the rule of law in a nation. Some of them includes: immunity of leaders, etc.

The last important pillar of democracy is fundamental human rights.

Democracy 4 pillars of investing investing in micro cap stocks

Can You FIX A Broken SOCIALIST Economy? - Democracy 4

FREE FOREX BONUS NO DEPOSIT REQUIRED 2015 FORD

Authorization to an G connectivity, democracy 4 pillars of investing a very high-port density, to provide super fast and of the network to which they for ideal deployments granted authorization core, and across. In these cases, setting that can Touchscreen Displays Install inherited that is updating a Appdata setup your conference apply username default. When you plug an NTFS disk free ModSecurity rules-based real-time visibility, advanced on the desktop on large components to resolve Comodo. Dedicated support channel comprehensive software solution most appropriate for matches a published application with KEYWORDS:prefer. However, there are graphical user interface bonuses on the counters are increasing, allow you to appear on.

Since democracy is a government by the people, there is hardly room for dictatorship and that is why many people love the system. Through this way, democracy is able to capture the dreams and aspirations of every member of the society and not the selfish desire of a particular dictator. Another reason why democracy is deemed to be the best system of government is because, unlike other systems of government, it encourages popular participation in politics a lot.

This is done either directly or through representatives elected by the people. Throughout history, there has never been any government that supports accountability and transparency as a democratic one. Even till today, the most transparent governments in the world are usually democratic in nature.

Democracy tries to carry everybody along and that is why the system is loved by many. Even when there is majority and minority in political decision making processes, democracy still provides and makes space for the minority. Below is an infographics showing the 7 essential pillars of democracy and a brief explanation of all of them. Legitimacy simply means the acceptance and recognition of the power to govern given to the leaders. It is one of the major pillars of democracy because the absence of legitimacy means that the people did not legally assign political powers to their leaders to govern them.

Legitimacy cannot be achieved when there is no periodical elections, conducted to enable the people appoint their leaders. It should also be noted that the same way the people can Legitimately appoint their leaders, they can also legitimately remove whoever they want from power through impeachment or recall.

Separation of powers is another important pillar of democracy. It is the segmentation of government powers to sidestep the problem of dictatorship and tyrannical leadership. Usually, the segment of powers is between the legislature, executive and judicial pillars of the government. So, instead of bestowing all political powers on one person of group of people or allowing just one arm of government to perform all government functions, powers and functions will be shared between the arms.

In most cases, the legislature will perform the law making function, the judiciary will perform the interpretation function and the executive will execute the law. Also read: Cheapest universities to attend in Canada. Democracy is unlike a monarchy where only persons from the lineage of the king or queen can rule. It is a system where everyone leads either directly or through representatives. For this reason, opinion polls and consultations are regular activities when political decisions are to be taken in a democratic nation.

Thorough research and debating are usually done within government representatives before government policies are reached or executed. An example of a country where this is seen is the Nigeria. Before the government takes any political move there is usually a deliberation of it in the house of assembly to ensure that it is for the best interest of the people.

Through period elections democracy is able to avoid dictatorship by leaders. Periodic elections is one of the tenets of democracy that cannot be overlooked. It is very important because it is the key pillar of democracy and also an important feature of a democratic system as well. Think about it this way; a nation that claims to be practicing democracy can not be said to be a true democratic nation if there is no period election.

The essence of democracy is to avoid arbitrary rules and one of the way to ensure that is through periodic elections. Also read: Major Characteristics of a good constitution. Checks and balances is a political theory and a very essential pillar of government.

This theory posits that there should be a mutual oversight and limitation by the arms of government in order to prevent abuse of power. I have already explained how separation of powers helps to foster democracy and fight against dictatorship in government.

Now, the theory of checks of balances further helps to achieve that by allowing the arms of government to check the activities of each other. Another reason for the theory of checks and balances is to curb excesses of power by one arm of the government. Thus, the judiciary can check the activities of the legislature or executive to see whether they are both acting under their assigned constitutional powers.

In turn, the legislature can check the activities of others and the executive can also do the same. Also read: Differences between offer and invitation to treat in contract law. Rule of law simply means supremacy of the law. It posits that the law is above everybody in a political system and thus, no arm of government, agency or organization is supreme. The theory of rule of law was propounded by A.

V Dicey. It is one of the greatest features and tenets of democracy because the dreams and aspirants of the people are contained in the law. This therefore makes the law Supreme even above the government itself. It should be noted however that there are many factors that can actually limit the rule of law in a nation.

Some of them includes: immunity of leaders, etc. The last important pillar of democracy is fundamental human rights. These rights are free given rights which are inalienable and immutable. Fundamental human rights are seen as one of the pillars of democracy because they protect the interest of citizens. Take for instance, the Universal declaration of human right ensures that member countries provide for the fundamental human rights of their citizens by entrenching it in the constitution.

These rights includes the right to life, right to freedom of speech, right to freedom of expression, freedom of movement etc. Where these rights are not provided for in the constitution, then there is no true democracy because the interest of the people are not well protected.

Also read: Differences between Cross-offers and counter-offers. So far we have looked at the meaning of democracy, types of democracy, reasons for democracy and the pillars of democracy. Obviously this article has done justice in explaining the major pillars of democracy and how the help to safeguard and maintain the features of democracy in a nation. However, if you have questions or comments on this work, kindly leave it at the comment section below.

Samuel is bent on changing the legal profession by building Web and Mobile Apps that will make legal research a lot easier. I am so blessed by this article. Once they were done reading it, they had to manage a Google Stocks portfolio and we monitored their success. Provides history, basics, a plan and the psychology of financing. William Bernstein, Ph. He has made a name for himself by questioning the value of Wall Street wisdom, skewering the recommendations of self-serving stockbrokers, and showing legions of investors how to successfully manage their own investments with intelligence and long-term vision.

Bernstein is the author of The Intelligent Asset Allocator , editor of the quarterly asset allocation journal Efficient Frontier , founder of the popular website EfficientFrontier. Labirint Ozon. William Bernstein.

Democracy 4 pillars of investing forex club options

DEMOCRACY 4 - CAPÍTULO 1 - \

Другие материалы по теме

  • Forex what is swing
  • The best licensed forex brokers
  • Knowledge to action forex seminars in maryland
  • Gp formula investing
  • Mutual fund investing styles of writing
  • Forex trade recommendation

    4 комментариев

    1. Mazurg :

      intraday forex

    2. Zulkicage :

      forex video templates

    3. Zuzil :

      forex course videos

    4. Shakaktilar :

      forex market analysis tools

    Добавить комментарий

    Ваш e-mail не будет опубликован. Обязательные поля помечены *