Much of the world has experienced a dramatic weakening of democratic principles in recent years. The trend includes elections being undermined by government interference, persistent human rights violations, and restrictions on civic expression, association, and assembly (often referred to as “civic space”).
In a recent decision on Ethiopia’s 2015 elections, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR), a body of the African Union, emphasized the crucial connection between civic space and the right to vote. It was a landmark determination in that it expanded the definition of the conditions necessary to ensure the right to vote by addressing a wide range of government-imposed limitations, including internet restrictions and the general closing of civic space. The decision crystallizes several legal standards on civic space and the right to vote that the commission had previously outlined in its guidelines.
Now, for the first time, the ACHPR has addressed these standards through its case law, offering a comprehensive framework for understanding the essential conditions for a free and fair election. And while the ultimate impact of the decision depends on the willingness of Ethiopia to comply with its recommendations, it provides a crucial tool for advocacy and can be used by civil society, decision-makers, and the international community to demand the necessary conditions for people to discuss politics and current issues, learn about candidates, protest and express grievances, join political groups, and hold leaders accountable — in short, to guarantee a robust right to vote.
This conclusion, in a case brought by our organization, Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights, and the Institute for Human Rights in Africa, highlights the dangers of repressing civic space, demonstrating how such actions undermine the democratic process. The Ethiopian government’s crackdown on media, public demonstrations, and civil society organizations ahead of the 2015 elections created an environment in which voters lacked the necessary information, autonomy, and freedom to make informed decisions. This not only violated their right to participate in public affairs but also cast doubt on the fairness and transparency of the electoral outcome.
The ACHPR’s decision, finally released to the public in July after the AU’s adoption in February, stresses the importance of an enabling environment in which the rights to freedom of expression, assembly, and association can flourish. These rights are not just legal abstractions; they require concrete protections and respect to ensure free and fair elections. When governments fail to provide such an environment, they violate these fundamental rights and compromise the integrity of the electoral process.
Not an Isolated Case
These standards are applicable beyond Ethiopia to other African countries that have ratified the AU’s African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and even beyond Africa, as they can serve as a basis for assessing the state of democracy in other countries. Ethiopia, of course, is not an isolated case. Recent elections in Venezuela, Togo, and Bangladesh show similar patterns of repressing civic space, leading to electoral outcomes benefiting those in power rather than the electorate. In these countries, there are frequent attacks on human rights defenders, including journalists and activists. However, these individuals are vital in informing the public and holding governments accountable. Suppressing them directly undermines the electoral process.
Venezuela under Nicolás Maduro is a stark example of how the erosion of civic space can lead to violations of the right to vote. The government’s tight control over the media, suppression of opposition parties, and persecution of civil society created an environment in which genuine political competition was impossible. The National Electoral Council, dominated by government loyalists, has routinely altered electoral laws to favor the ruling party, barred key opposition figures from running, and manipulated voter-registration processes. Election observers from the Atlanta-based Carter Center concluded that the July 2024 election did not meet international standards and was undemocratic. The elections were quickly followed by massive protests, which also were violently suppressed by the government.
Togo’s government has similarly undermined freedom of expression and participation to maintain the ruling party in power. Ahead of the April 2024 elections, the Togolese government intensified its crackdown on opposition parties, restricted freedom of assembly, and imposed severe limitations on civil society organizations. This environment severely compromised the electorate’s ability to participate freely in elections.
Then, 10 days before the elections, Togo’s parliament adopted a new, highly controversial constitution. It transitioned the government from a presidential to a parliamentary system in which the president would be elected by parliament instead of by popular vote. In the lead-up to the elections and as a response to protests against the new constitution, the government banned demonstrations and used intimidation and reprisals, such as arbitrary detention, to silence dissenting voices. Authorities also cracked down on journalists and the media by surveilling, detaining, and intimidating journalists, banning some local and foreign media from covering the elections, and refusing to grant observer status for independent election monitors.
In Bangladesh, widespread allegations of electoral fraud, voter suppression, and the repression of opposition parties marred the January 2024 elections. The government’s assault on basic civic activity included restrictions on media freedom, arrests of opposition leaders, and harassment of civil society organizations.
Ahead of the general elections, the Bangladesh government intensified its silencing of opposition party members and journalists by stepping up the number of arrests, which in turn led to self-censorship by journalists and human rights activists. The government cracked down on protests, opposition party meetings, and human rights organizations, accelerating arbitrary arrests, detentions, enforced disappearances, and extrajudicial killings. Amid widespread allegations of electoral fraud, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina won by an overwhelming majority.
A few months later, in response to the reinstatement of a highly politicized quota system for recruiting public servants, massive student-led protests erupted. The government brutally suppressed the protests, with nearly 300 people killed and thousands of others injured and/or arbitrarily detained. Fortunately, Bangladesh has now undertaken a turnaround and become a cautionary tale for oppressive regimes: Sheikh Hasina’s resignation in early August following further massive protests indicates the potential consequences for leaders of ignoring the public right of civic participation in the electoral process and reveals the true power of the electorate.
The Same Playbook on Repression
The parallels between Ethiopia and the situations in Venezuela, Togo, and Bangladesh are striking. Governments used the same playbook in each country: deliberately closing civic space to manipulate elections and maintain power.
The ACHPR’s decision is a powerful reminder that protecting civic space is crucial for preserving democracy. When civic space is restricted, an election fails to reflect the people’s true will, leading to a deepening of political and social crises. An element of that civic space that is fundamental to the electoral process is the right to receive information. Without this right, as seen in these four cases, the electorate’s ability to participate meaningfully in elections is effectively nullified, leading to outcomes that entrench those in power rather than reflect the people’s will. In all four countries, government control over the media and suppression of dissenting voices created a climate of fear, preventing the electorate from accessing unbiased information and making it virtually impossible for any opposition party to safely and effectively operate. In its conclusion on Ethiopia, the ACHPR powerfully and unequivocally affirmed that such restrictions violated the entire electorate’s right to vote, stating that, “Each unlawful restriction to civic space and the broader chilling effect produced by this systematic pattern of repression prevented the free flow of information, public debate, and dialogue from taking place in the 2015 electoral period. As a result, no Ethiopian was able to fully exercise their right to vote…”
The ACHPR’s decision highlights that the rights to freedom of assembly and association must be more than just legally recognized; they must be actively protected and respected in practice. In all four countries, the government’s repeated use of force to disperse opposition rallies and its arbitrary arrests of political activists are clear violations of these rights. Crackdowns on public protests and use of force against demonstrators created climates of intimidation, preventing citizens from freely expressing their political views and from fully engaging in the electoral process. The ACHPR highlighted that these rights are crucial for a vibrant and open civic space and essential for ensuring that elections are not just a formality but a genuine reflection of the people’s will. The inability of people to fully engage in the electoral process through association and protest has led to the consolidation and preservation of power in increasingly repressive countries across the globe, and will likely lead to an increase in repression against opposition and dissidents, as well as other human rights violations in the future.
In the case of Ethiopia, the current government is unlikely to change its behavior based solely on this ACHPR determination, and it carries no direct mechanisms of enforcement. The impact will be determined by domestic political will and the effectiveness of both local and international pressure.
But the commission’s recognition of the crucial role of civic space in ensuring free and fair elections provides a framework for holding governments accountable when they undermine democratic processes. This decision should serve as a warning to governments worldwide that restrictions on civic space and restrictions on the right to vote will not go unnoticed or unchallenged.
For civil society and human rights defenders, this decision is a powerful tool in the fight to protect civic space and ensure electoral integrity. By highlighting the importance of an enabling environment for exercising political rights, the African Commission has provided a roadmap for safeguarding democracy in the face of authoritarianism. As the global struggle for democracy continues, the African Commission’s conclusion reminds us that the fight for civic space is a fight for the very soul of democracy. The international community must stand firm in its defense and protection of democratic principles, recognizing that the erosion of civic space anywhere threatens democracy everywhere.