1

A PROJECT ON
PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY

Submitted By:
AYUSHI DWIVEDI
Roll No. 47
B.A. LL.B (HONS.)
Semester I Batch XIII
SEC-A


Submitted To
Dr. Avinash Samal
(Assistant Prof. Political Science)










HIDAYATULLAH NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY
RAIPUR CHHATTISGARH

Submitted On 26
th
OCTOBER, 2013

2


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:

First and foremost, I would like to thank my Political Science teacher Dr. Avinash Samal
for offering this subject, PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY and for his valuable guidance
and advice. He inspired me greatly to work in this project. His willingness to motivate me
contributed tremendously to my project. I also would like to thank him for showing me some
example that related to the topic of my project.

Besides, I would like to thank the Hidayatullah National Law University for providing me with a
good environment and facilities to complete this project.

Last but not least, I would like to thank my family and all my friends who helped me do this
project by sharing their ideas when we discussed together.


_____________________
AYUSHI DWIVEDI
ROLL NO. 47
SECTION: A





3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION...5
EVOLUTION OF PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY.6
PROS AND CONS OF PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY..7-8
CASE STUDY.9
1. Right to Reject.
2. Right to Recall.
CONCLUSION14
REFERENCES.15








4

OBJECTIVES
To study the concept of Participatory Democracy and its features.
To understand the concepts of Right to Recall and Right to Reject as the two important
instruments of Participatory Democracy.


RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research is descriptive and analytical in nature. Secondary & Electronic resources have been
largely used to gather information & data about the topic. Books & other reference as guided by
Faculty have been primarily helpful in giving this project a firm structure. Websites, dictionaries
& articles have also been referred.









5

INTRODUCTION
DEMOCRACY:
Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens participate equallyeither
directly or through elected representativesin the proposal, development, and creation of laws.
It encompasses social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice
of political self-determination.
According to Robert Dahl, "Democracy provides opportunities for effective participation,
equality in voting, gaining enlightened understanding, exercising final control [by the people--
WR] over the agenda, and inclusion of adults."
The political institutions that are necessary to pursue these goals are elected officials free, fair
and frequent elections, freedom of expression, alternative sources of information, associational
autonomy, and inclusive citizenship.

PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY
Participatory democracy is a process emphasizing the broad participation of constituents in the
direction and operation of political systems. The etymological roots of democracy
(Greek demos and kratos) imply that the people are in power and, thus, that all democracies are
participatory. However, participatory democracy tends to advocate more involved forms of
citizen participation than traditional representative democracy. Participatory democracy strives to
create opportunities for all members of a population to make meaningful contributions to
decision making and seeks to broaden the range of people who have access to such
opportunities.
1
Participatory democracy tends to advocate more involved forms of citizen
participation than traditional representative democracy.


1
Participatory Democracy, available at www.boundless.com/sociology/understanding-
government/democracy/participatory-democracy
6

EVOLUTION OF PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY
Participation is at the core of the meaning of democracy since time immemorial. Beginning the
time of the ancient Greek democracy in the 5th BC, participation of people in determining
decisions affecting their own lives was regarded as the key defining feature of the Athenian
democracy. However, the idea of democracy has evolved into various forms across time and
space. The changing nature of democracy has also affected the form and character of
participation. That is, as democracy is being re-conceptualized, and so is participation. Athenian
democracy was built on the idea of direct participation in which the people governed directly
rather than through the medium of elections and representative institutions.
2

Overtime, other forms of democracy emerged including liberal democracy, representative
democracy, elitist democracy, pluralist democracy, popular democracy, to mention only a few.
Direct participation became to be replaced by indirect participation of people through
representation either through politicians or interest groups. With the development of the nation-
state, the practice of direct participation in a small community became unattainable and
representation had to be applied in order to make democracy attainable.
3

However, increased scale from city-states to nation-states was not the only reason for this move
away from the practice of direct participation. The increased direct popular participation became
to be regarded as a threat to the development of capital and private ownership. As the need to
protect the established capitalist order became stronger, and so was the trend toward the
squeezing of popular participation. Paradoxically, direct participation of people in decision
making needed to be circumscribed in order to make modern democracy work.
4

It is in this context that another variant of democracy known as participatory democracy
emerged in an attempt to recapture peoples power to determine their own fate and to correct the
representative democracy whenever it becomes misrepresentative.
5


2
Bernardeta Killian, Participatory Democracy in Tanzania
3
ibid
4
ibid
5
ibid

7

PROS AND CONS OF PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY

Pros of Participatory Democracy:-
The key idea of participatory democracy is to promote, as far as possible, an equal distribution of
power over collective decision making. It is a full expression of the idea that all citizens have
equal status in society. Participatory democracy ensures that there is a high degree of equality in
the outcomes of decision making. It allows people to be masters of their own lives to be fully
self-determining or autonomous. Self-determination at both the individual level and the level of
groups or collectives. As individual citizens have an interest in trying to live our lives according
to our own lights, and not to have other people's ideas of what's good for us imposed on us
against our will. Participatory democracy can be seen as a way of allowing us to ensure that
collective decisions respect individual freedom. As members of groups, ranging from households
and clubs through workplaces, trade unions, and neighbor hoods to states and international
organisations, we also have an interest in living according to our collective will and not
according to plans other people make for us. Participatory democracy enable collectively control
our life in common for ourselves.
Participatory democracy is good for a sense of community and for good social relationships in a
number of ways. For example, participatory democracy is supposed to strengthen identification
with the community because people feel that they are accepted and that their voice is heard; they
are not excluded and alienated from society. Participatory democracy is also said to promote
public spirit, because being involved in democratic decision-making forces people to listen to
others and take their interests and ideas into account. Full participation can't be based simply on
the idea of 'what's in it for me' -- it has to be based on a responsible attitude of mutual respect
and concern, of give and take.
6







6
Baker, What is ParticipatoryDemocracy?, 1997
8

Cons of Participatory Democracy:-

Participatory democracy seems time-consuming. It can take long to reach decisions. Now
imagine that this is multiplied by a thorough democratization of society.
Another problem is the problem of scale. It is not practically possible to have participatory
democracy in countries with larger area. In a participatory democracy, everyone is involved. One
of the problem is simple ignorance, second one is apathy and the third problem is self-interest.
The participatory democracy ideal is of public-spirited citizens who participate on the basis of
mutual respect and concern and a commitment to the common good. But is democracy of any
kind really like that? Isn't it more likely that people would participate mainly on the basis of self-
interest and narrow sectarian values, so that participatory democracy would simply heighten
social conflict?
Participatory democracy is based on equality and self-determination. But the standard way of
deciding things in democracies is majority rule. There is no equality of power in any meaningful
sense in a system in which minority groups dont get equal rights. Nor can those groups be said
to be self-determining in any meaningful sense if they are rarely successful in determining the
collective view. Everyone has the right to participate in decision making. But in our society some
people are much better resourced for participation than others, whether in terms of straight
financial backing or in terms of education, knowledge, organisational skills and free time. It is
hard to see how this inequality can fail to translate into an inequality of power which in turn
creates unequal outcomes.
7








7
ibid
9

CASE STUDY
RIGHT TO REJECT AS A DEVICE OF PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY:
Right to Reject: Meaning
Candidates are chosen by the political parties but it might happen that people in the constituency
are discontented with the candidates presented to them. On the voting machine, below the names
of the candidates, a new option would be inserted which says None of the above. A voter may
choose None of the Above option to express disapproval of all the candidates given on the
list. If None of the Above option gets the maximum votes in the constituency then all the
candidates would be considered as rejected. In such scenario, re-elections would take place with
new candidates.
Something similar already exists in the Rule 49-O Conduct of Election Rules, 1961. It states that
if a person does not want to vote, and wishes to get this fact recorded, he may follow a set
procedure in the election booth and do so. But it is not as practical or as grand as Right to Reject.

Present Scenario In India
India being democratic nation practices electoral system. Under this system, the citizens of India
choose their elected representatives at the local, state and the national level. Elections are held
every 5 years. The voters can vote for their preferred choice of candidates, among the available
options. The candidate who gets the maximum number of valid votes is considered as an elected
representative of the people.
This elected candidate is expected to do due justice to the aspirations of constituency -
irrespective of the manner in which the underlying people in that constituency would have cast
their vote. It is his responsibility to ensure an all round development of the constituency. It is his
duty to give voice to the people in the corridors of power. It is his obligation to discharge his
duties with due fairness.
However, such elected representatives do not meet the peoples expectations once they are
elected to power. They do not discharge the duties expected out of them. Instead of focusing on
the development of their folks, they are more focused on their own personal development.
10

Improvement of their constituency takes a back seat. Aspirations of the people are not met.
Personal aspirations often take center stage.
The system does not offer any mechanism to the people for changing the elected representative
in the midst of his tenure. This lead to citizens being discouraged to vote in elections as they
dont find any candidate worth it.

Right To Reject Is A Instrument Of Participatory Democracy
Introduction of right to reject in India can gives people a chance to reject all the candidates.
Earlier due to absence of proper options to choose people are discouraged from voting. Voting is
the essence of a democracy and in a representative democracy country like India, this voting
system gives people a chance to decide for the nation. With the help of this right to reject now
citizens are more encouraged to participate in the decision making. This leads to maximum
participation of citizens which is the most important feature of participatory democracy and a
step towards it.
The court further reasoned that a voter may refrain from voting at an election for the reason that
he does not consider any of the candidates in the field worthy of his vote. One of the ways of
such expression may be to abstain from voting, which is not an ideal option for a conscientious
and responsible citizen. The only way by which it can be made effectual is by providing a button
in the electronic voting machines (EVMs) to express that right, the court held. Under the ballot
paper system (prior to the introduction of EVMs in 1998), it was possible to secretly cast a
neutral/negative vote by dropping ones ballot in the ballot box without making any mark on it.
Under the EVM system, such secret neutral voting is not possible, in view of Rule 49B (which
deals with arranging the names of the candidates on the balloting unit of the EVM), which has no
provision for a neutral button.
8

The above article was about a statement given by Supreme Court of India on Right to Reject.
This gives right to citizens to reject those candidates who didnt fulfill their expectations and

8
None of the above, Frontline, November 1,2013.
11

take more part in decision making. It works as an instrument of participatory democracy by
involving more citizens in decision making.

RIGHT TO RECALL
Recall: Meaning
The recall is a participatory democracy procedure that allows the appropriate authority and/or a
specified number of citizens to demand a vote for the electorate on whether an elected holder of
public office should be removed from that office before the end of his or her term. This implies
that the recall must fulfil a set of requirements, which distinguish this procedure from others
aimed at terminating an elected officials period in office, such as impeachment. To be
considered an instrument of participatory democracy, the process of legally interrupting the
period in office of an elected official must involve the initiative and/or the vote of the electorate.
When the initiative and the decision to do this come exclusively from the legally established
authorities, such as the legislative or the judicial branch, and do not require the voters
involvement at any phase of the process, the procedure is more properly called impeachment.
9


Right to Recall As An Instrument of Participatory Democracy
A recall requires citizens intervention, whether it be to support or to reject through a vote in a
referendum a decision taken by an authoritative body, or as the initiators of the request which
may then be processed and approved by an authoritative body. These could be considered mixed
recalls. The procedure is most participatory when both the initiative and the approval of the
recall require the direct intervention of the citizens, first as the initiators of the request and
second by expressing their support for or rejection of the initiative by casting their votes in a

9
Direct Democracy: The International IDEA Handbook, available at
www.idea.int/publications/direct_democracy/upload/direct_democracy_handbook_chapter5.pdf (visited on)
12

referendum. We define this procedure as a full recall. Some countries provide for a mixed recall
for the highest executive officials and a full recall for members of national legislative bodies.
10

The table given below shows the requirements for the recall in different states of U.S.
11
:
STATE YEAR
ADOPTED
POSITIONS SIGNATURE
REQUIREMENTS
California 1911 All State-wide officers:
12% of votes cast,
1% from each of 5
counties. Others:
20% votes of cast


Georgia 1978 All 15% of eligibility of
electors**, and each
from 1 congressional
district


Alaska 1959 All but judicial
officer
25% of votes cast*
New Jersey All 25% of votes cast
Washington 1912 All but judicial
officer
State wide officer:
25% of votes cast and
Oyhers; 355 of votes
cast
Rhode Island


Governor,
lieutenant-
governor, secretary
of state, treasurer,
attorney general


15% of votes cast for
the office in the last
general election
Minnesota Executive, Legislator 25% of votes

10
ibid
11
ibid
13

and Judicial Officer

* Votes cast for office in previous election.
** Eligible electors in previous election.
The above given table shows that recall of government officials is not just of elected candidates
but in country like Minnesota recall is also of judicial officers. On the other hand in countries
like Washington and Alaska judicial officers are also recalled. It shows that how participatory
democracy is practiced by giving citizens right to recall the candidates who dont fulfill their
expectations.















14


CONCLUSION

Participatory democracy strives to create opportunities for all members of a population to make
meaningful contributions to decision making, and seeks to broaden the range of people who have
access to such opportunities. Right to reject encourages citizens to participate more in decision
making by giving them right to reject candidates, this lead to greater participation of citizens.
Right to recall gives citizen right to recall the government officials who didnt fulfill their
expectations by participating in voting to recall the officials. Right to reject and right to recall are
instruments of participatory democracy by providing greater means of participation in decision
making.












15


REFERENCES
BOOKS:
O.P.Gauba, An Introduction to Political Theory, 6
th
Edition.

ARTICLES:
Direct Democracy: The International IDEA Handbook
Bernardeta Killian, Participatory Democracy in Tanzania
Baker, What is Participatory Democracy?, 1997

WEBSITES:
www.idea.int/publications/direct_democracy/upload/direct_democracy_handbook_chapte
r5.pdf
www.boundless.com/sociology/understanding-government/democracy/participatory-
democracys