DOCSLIB.ORG

Freedom in the World 2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Freedom in the World 2018 Democracy in Crisis FREEDOM IN THE WORLD 2018 Highlights from Freedom House’s annual report on political rights and civil liberties This report was made possible by the generous support of the Smith Richardson Foundation and the Lilly Endowment. Freedom House also gratefully acknowledges the contributions of the Reed Foundation, the Achelis & Bodman Foundation, David L. Fogel, and additional private contributors who wish to remain anonymous. Freedom in the World 2018 Table of Contents Democracy in Crisis 1 Methodology 2 The United States in decline 3 Mugabe’s fall from power in Zimbabwe 4 Ethnic cleansing in Myanmar 5 Worst of the Worst 6 Turkey moves to ‘Not Free’ 7 International pressure helps end decades of oppression in The Gambia 7 An Arab success story founders in Tunisia 8 Countries to Watch in 2018 9 Regional Trends 11 Freedom in the World 2018 Map 12 Freedom in the World 2018 Status Changes 18 Freedom in the World 2018 Trend Arrows 19 The following people were instrumental in the writing of this booklet: Elen Aghekyan, Rukmani Bhatia, Jen- nifer Dunham, Shannon O’Toole, Arch Puddington, Sarah Repucci, Tyler Roylance, and Vanessa Tucker. This booklet is a summary of findings for the 2018 edition of Freedom in the World. The complete analysis including narrative reports on all countries and territories can be found on our website at www.freedomhouse.org. ON THE COVER Cover image by KAL. FREEDOM IN THE WORLD 2018 Democracy in Crisis by Michael J. Abramowitz Political rights and civil liberties around the world deteriorated to their lowest point in more than a decade in 2017, extending a period characterized by emboldened autocrats, beleaguered democracies, and the United States’ withdrawal from its leadership role in the global struggle for human freedom. Democracy is in crisis. The values it embodies—par- civil and political liberties. Right-wing populists gained ticularly the right to choose leaders in free and fair votes and parliamentary seats in France, the Nether- elections, freedom of the press, and the rule of law— lands, Germany, and Austria during 2017. While they are under assault and in retreat globally. were kept out of government in all but Austria, their success at the polls helped to weaken established A quarter-century ago, at the end of the Cold War, parties on both the right and left. Centrist newcomer it appeared that totalitarianism had at last been Emmanuel Macron handily won the French presiden- vanquished and liberal democracy had won the great cy, but in Germany and the Netherlands, mainstream ideological battle of the 20th century. parties struggled to create stable governing coalitions. Today, it is democracy that finds itself battered and Perhaps worst of all, and most worrisome for the future, weakened. For the 12th consecutive year, according young people, who have little memory of the long strug- to Freedom in the World, countries that suffered dem- gles against fascism and communism, may be losing ocratic setbacks outnumbered those that registered faith and interest in the democratic project. The very gains. States that a decade ago seemed like promising idea of democracy and its promotion has been tarnished success stories—Turkey and Hungary, for exam- among many, contributing to a dangerous apathy. ple—are sliding into authoritarian rule. The military in Myanmar, which began a limited democratic opening The retreat of democracies is troubling enough. Yet in 2010, executed a shocking campaign of ethnic at the same time, the world’s leading autocracies, cleansing in 2017 and rebuffed international criticism China and Russia, have seized the opportunity not of its actions. Meanwhile, the world’s most power- only to step up internal repression but also to export ful democracies are mired in seemingly intractable their malign influence to other countries, which are problems at home, including social and economic increasingly copying their behavior and adopting their disparities, partisan fragmentation, terrorist attacks, disdain for democracy. A confident Chinese president and an influx of refugees that has strained alliances Xi Jinping recently proclaimed that China is “blazing and increased fears of the “other.” a new trail” for developing countries to follow. It is a path that includes politicized courts, intolerance for The challenges within democratic states have fueled dissent, and predetermined elections. the rise of populist leaders who appeal to anti-immi- grant sentiment and give short shrift to fundamental The spread of antidemocratic practices around the www.freedomhouse.org 1 EURASIA: STATUS BY POPULATION AMERICAS: STATUS BY POPULATION ASIA-PACIFIC: STATUS BY POPULATION EUROPE: STATUS BY POPULATION Total population Total population Total population Total population 286.7 million 992.3 million 4.1 billion 618.1 million 21% 38% 69% 85% 22% 79% 27% 40% 2% 4% 13% EURASIA: STATUS BY POPULATION AMERICAS: STATUS BY POPULATION ASIA-PACIFIC: STATUS BY POPULATION EURASIA: STATUS BY COUNTRY AMERICAS: STATUS BY COUNTRY ASIA-PACIFICEUROPE: STATUS BY COUNTRYPOPULATION EUROPE: STATUS BY COUNTRY Total population Total population Total population6% Total population 286.7 million 992.3 million FREEDOM Democracy in Crisis4.1 billion 618.1 million 2% 42% IN THE WORLD 28% 21% 46% 12% 2018 21% 38% Freedom in the World methodology 69% Total Total Total Freedom in the World 2018 evaluates the state of The methodology, which is derived from the Total countries countries countries 85% countries 22% freedom in35 195 countries and 14 territories during Universal Declaration39 of Human Rights, is applied 12 calendar year 2017. Each country and territory is to all countries and territories, irrespective of geo- 42 79% assigned between 0 and 4 points on a series of graphic location, ethnic or religious composition, 25 indicators, for an aggregate score of up to 100. or level of economic development. These scores are used to determine two numerical 27% 40% 58% ratings, for political rights66% and civil liberties, with a 33%Freedom in the World assesses the real-world 2% 86% 4% rating of 1 representing the most free conditions rights and freedoms enjoyed by individuals, rather13% and 7 the least free. A country or territory’s politi- than governments or government performance cal rights and civil liberties ratings then determine per se. Political rights and civil liberties can be EURASIA: STATUS BY COUNTRY AMERICAS: STATUS BY COUNTRY ASIA-PACIFICwhether it has: ST AanTUS overall BY COUNTRY status of Free, Partly Free, affectedEUROPE: SbyT AbothTUS stateBY COUNTRY and nonstate actors, includ- or Not Free. ing insurgents and other armed groups. MIDDLE EAST: STATUS BY POPULATI6%ON SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA: WORLD: STATUS BY POPULATION STAForTUS complete BY POPUL informationATION on the methodology, visit https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world-2018/methodology.2% 42% 28% 21% 46% 12% Total population Total population Total population 424.8 million world is not merely1.02 a billionsetback for fundamental free- ignoring all constraints7.4 billion themselves, spurring a vicious doms. It poses economic and security risks. When circle of abuse and radicalization. 5% more countries are free, all countries—including the Total Total 11% Total 12% United States—are safer and more prosperous. When The United StatesTotal accelerates its countries countries more countries countriesare autocratic and repressive, treaties 39%withdrawal fromcountries the democracy struggle 12 35 and alliances crumble,39 nations and entire regions A long list of troubling42 developments around the world become unstable, and violent extremists have52% greater contributed to the global decline in 2017, but perhaps room to operate. most striking was the accelerating withdrawal of the 83% 24%United States from its historical commitment to promot- 58% 66% Democratic33% governments allow people to help set the ing and supporting democracy. The potent challenge rules to which all must adhere, and have a say in the from authoritarian regimes made the 86%United States’ direction of their lives and work. This fosters a broader abdication of its traditional role all the more important. respect for peace, fair play, and compromise.37% Auto- 37% crats impose arbitrary rules on their citizens while Despite the U.S. government’s mistakes—and there MIDDLE EAST: STATUS BY POPULATION SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA: WORLD: STATUS BY POPULATION STATUS BY POPULATION FREE GLOBAL: STATUS BY POPULATION GLOBAL: STATUS BY COUNTRY MIDDLE EAST: STATUS BY COUNTRY SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA: WORLD: STATUS BY COUNTRY Total population Total population PARTLY FREE STATUS BY COUNTRYTotal population 424.8 million 11% 1.02 billion NOT FREE 7.4 billion 25% 45% 5% 39% 18% 11% 12% 22% 39% Total 52% Total Total countries countries 83% 24% countries 18 49 195 37% 37% 67% 30% 43% 2 MIDDLE EAST: STATUS BY COUNTRY SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA: WORLD: STATUS BY COUNTRY STATUS BY COUNTRY 11% 25% 45% 39% 18% 22% Total Total Total countries countries countries 18 49 195 67% 30% 43% Freedom House The United States in decline senior officials despite apparent conflicts of interest; and Freedom House has tracked a slow decline in po- litical rights and civil liberties in the United States • a reduction in government transparency, includ- for the past seven years. Prominent concerns ing an unusual pattern of false statements by the have included the influence of money in politics, administration, the president’s failure to disclose legislative dysfunction, and severe inequalities in basic information such as his personal tax data, the criminal justice system. policy and other decisions made without mean- ingful input from relevant agencies and officials, In 2017, however, the deterioration accelerated. The and the removal of information on issues of United States lost three points on the 100-point public interest from government websites for scale used by Freedom in the World due to: political or ideological reasons. • growing evidence of Russian interference in the The United States now receives a score of 86 out 2016 election campaign and a lack of action by of 100 points.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Egypt Digital Rights Landscape Report
    ids.ac.uk Digital Rights in Closing Civic Space: Lessons from Ten African Countries 209 Egypt Digital Rights Landscape Report Egypt Digital Rights Landscape Report Mohamed Farahat This is an Open Access report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence (CC BY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and source are credited and any modifications or adaptations are indicated. This report is part of ‘Digital Rights in Closing Civic Space: Lessons from Ten African Countries’; the Introduction is also recommended reading. © 2021 Mohamed Farahat © Institute of Development Studies. DOI: 10.19088/IDS.2021.014 ids.ac.uk Digital Rights in Closing Civic Space: Lessons from Ten African Countries 210 Egypt Digital Rights Landscape Report 1. Introduction Egypt has experienced many political and social changes prior to and since the 2011 uprising. These changes have had a significant impact on civic space offline, as well as online. Digital rights are simply human rights in online spaces and are recognised as being of central importance. This is especially true when closing civic space in the physical world means that opening civic space online is a necessary last resort. The coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic has highlighted the importance of digital rights, especially for vulnerable groups such as refugees and people in rural and remote areas. The main objective of this report is to give an overview of digital rights in Egypt, especially in the context of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, the right to access the internet, and for access to information, and the right to knowledge; and to explore the impacts of the political context on civic space in general and digital rights in particular.
    [Show full text]
  • China Resilient, Sophisticated Authoritarianism
    21st Century Authoritarians Freedom House Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Radio Free Asia JUNE 2009 FFH_UD7.inddH_UD7.indd iiiiii 55/22/09/22/09 111:221:22 AAMM CHINA RESILIENT, SOPHISTICATED AUTHORITARIANISM Joshua Kurlantzick Perry Link Chinese Communist Party leaders have clearly embraced the idea of soft power, and it has become central to their discourse about China’s role in the world. While only fi ve years ago Chinese offi cials and academics denied they had any lessons to offer to the developing world, today they not only accept this idea but use their training programs for foreign offi cials to promote aspects of the China model of development. introduction In 1989, in the wake of the crackdown on prodemocracy protesters in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, the moral and ideological standing of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was at an all-time low. Popular complaints about corruption and special privileges for the elite were widespread. Idealistic language about socialism was seen as empty sloganeering. The Tiananmen killings showed that the “people’s army” could open fi re on the people themselves. China’s agricultural economy had been partially liberated, but the urban econ- omy still seemed locked within the iron framework of a work-unit system that was both ineffi cient and corrupt. No one either inside or outside China saw the country as a model for others. Now, nearly 20 years later, the prestige of the CCP has risen dramatically on the twin geysers of a long economic boom and a revived Han chauvinism. The expectation that more wealth in China would lead to more democracy (a fond hope in many foreign capitals) has been frustrated as one-party rule persists.
    [Show full text]
  • Table and Graphs
    Table and Graphs Figure 1. Electoral Process in Putin’s Russia This graph illustrates the deterioration of Russia’s electoral process score in Nations in Transit, an annual Freedom House publication on democratization from Central Europe to Central Asia. Each indicator is assessed on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the best performance and 7 the worst. Russia has leveled off at 6.5 since the 2008 edition, though the events of calendar 2012 have yet to be assessed. Decline in Electoral Process Score: 2001–2012 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 1 2 3 4 5 Electoral Process Score Process Electoral 6 7 Figure 2. Civil Society in Putin’s Russia This graph illustrates a similar pattern on the indicator for civil society, although an increase in civic activity in recent years has been registered in the scores. Again, the negative events of calendar 2012 will be covered in the forthcoming 2013 edition of Nations in Transit. Decline in Civil Society Score: 2001–2012 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 1 2 3 4 5 Civil Society Score Society Civil 6 7 Figure 3. Putin’s Russia and the World This table shows Russia’s position in comparison with the world and a selection of other regions, as measured by Freedom in the World 2013, the latest edition of Freedom House’s annual global report. The publication assigns each country two ratings—for political rights and civil liberties—on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the best performance and 7 the worst.
    [Show full text]
  • FREEDOM in the WORLD 2020 United Arab Emirates 17 NOT FREE /100
    4/28/2020 United Arab Emirates | Freedom House FREEDOM IN THE WORLD 2020 United Arab Emirates 17 NOT FREE /100 Political Rights 5 /40 Civil Liberties 12 /60 LAST YEAR'S SCORE & STATUS 17 /100 Not Free Global freedom statuses are calculated on a weighted scale. See the methodology. TOP https://freedomhouse.org/country/united-arab-emirates/freedom-world/2020 1/15 4/28/2020 United Arab Emirates | Freedom House Overview The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is a federation of seven emirates led in practice by Abu Dhabi, the largest by area and richest in natural resources. Limited elections are held for a federal advisory body, but political parties are banned, and all executive, legislative, and judicial authority ultimately rests with the seven hereditary rulers. The civil liberties of both citizens and noncitizens, who make up an overwhelming majority of the population, are subject to significant restrictions. Key Developments in 2019 Pope Francis undertook the first papal visit to the UAE and the Arabian Peninsula in February, as Emirati officials sought to burnish the country’s reputation for religious tolerance. In May, Emirati media circulated video images of Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed al- Nahyan, ruler of Abu Dhabi and president of the UAE, meeting well-wishers during Ramadan. Sheikh Khalifa had rarely appeared in public since suffering a stroke in 2014; his half-brother and designated heir, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan, remained the country’s de facto ruler. Nonpartisan elections for half of the seats on the UAE’s advisory council were held in October, featuring a somewhat expanded pool of eligible voters and greater participation by women candidates, though turnout remained low.
    [Show full text]
  • United Arab Emirates 2013 Human Rights Report
    UNITED ARAB EMIRATES 2013 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is a federation of seven semiautonomous emirates with a resident population of approximately 9.2 million, of whom an estimated 11.5 percent are citizens. The rulers of the seven emirates constitute the Federal Supreme Council, the country’s highest legislative and executive body. The council selects a president and a vice president from its membership, and the president appoints the prime minister and cabinet. In 2009 the council selected Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed al- Nahyan, ruler of Abu Dhabi Emirate, to a second five-year term as president. The emirates are under patriarchal rule with political allegiance defined by loyalty to tribal leaders, leaders of the individual emirates, and leaders of the federation. There are limited democratically elected institutions, but no political parties. A limited appointed electorate participates in periodic elections for the Federal National Council (FNC), a consultative body that can examine, review, and recommend changes to legislation, consisting of 40 representatives allocated proportionally to each emirate based on population. In 2011 the appointed electorate of approximately 129,000 citizens elected 20 FNC members, and the rulers of the individual emirates appointed the other 20. Citizens can express their concerns directly to their leaders through traditional consultative mechanisms such as the open majlis (forum). Topics of legislation can also emerge through discussions and debates in the FNC. While authorities maintained effective control over the security forces, there were some media reports of human rights abuses by police. The three most significant human rights problems were citizens’ inability to change their government; limitations on citizens’ civil liberties (including the freedoms of speech, press, assembly, association, and internet use); and arbitrary arrests, incommunicado detentions, and lengthy pretrial detentions.
    [Show full text]
  • Kazakhstan by Bhavna Dave
    Kazakhstan by Bhavna Dave Capital: Astana Population: 15.9 million GNI/capita, PPP: US$10,320 Source: !e data above was provided by !e World Bank, World Development Indicators 2011. Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Electoral Process 6.25 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.75 6.75 6.75 6.75 Civil Society 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.75 5.75 5.50 5.50 5.75 5.75 Independent Media 6.00 6.25 6.50 6.50 6.75 6.75 6.75 6.50 6.75 6.75 Governance* 5.75 6.25 6.25 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a National Democratic 6.75 Governance n/a n/a n/a 6.50 6.75 6.75 6.75 6.75 6.75 Local Democratic 6.25 Governance n/a n/a n/a 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.25 Judicial Framework 6.25 and Independence 6.00 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.00 6.25 Corruption 6.25 6.25 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.50 Democracy Score 5.96 6.17 6.25 6.29 6.39 6.39 6.39 6.32 6.43 6.43 * Starting with the 2005 edition, Freedom House introduced separate analysis and ratings for national democratic governance and local democratic governance to provide readers with more detailed and nuanced analysis of these two important subjects.
    [Show full text]
  • Working Paper 52
    INSTITUTE Multiple Measurements, Elusive Agreement, and Unstable Outcomes in the Study of Regime Change Hans Lueders Ellen Lust September 2017 Working Paper SERIES 2017:52 THE VARIETIES OF DEMOCRACY INSTITUTE Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) is a new approach to conceptualization and measurement of democracy. It is co-hosted by the University of Gothenburg and University of Notre Dame. With a V-Dem Institute at University of Gothenburg with almost ten staff, and a project team across the world with four Principal Investigators, fifteen Project Managers (PMs), 30+ Regional Managers, 170 Country Coordinators, Research Assistants, and 2,500 Country Experts, the V- Dem project is one of the largest ever social science research-oriented data collection programs. Please address comments and/or queries for information to: V-Dem Institute Department of Political Science University of Gothenburg Sprängkullsgatan 19, PO Box 711 SE 40530 Gothenburg Sweden E-mail: [email protected] V-Dem Working Papers are available in electronic format at www.v-dem.net. Copyright © 2017 University of Gothenburg, V-Dem Institute. All rights reserved. Multiple Measurements, Elusive Agreement, and Unstable Outcomes in the Study of Regime Change* Hans Lueders PhD Candidate Stanford University Ellen Lust Professor University of Gothenburg * We thank Matt Buehler, Lindsay Hundley, Jana Morgan, Michael Touchton, Jeremy Wallace, and participants at the 2015 APSA, 2016 SPSA, and 2016 MPSA meetings for helpful comments. We gratefully acknowledge collaboration with David Waldner and support of the USAID/IIE Grant, “Unwelcome Change: Understanding, Examining and Extending Theories of Democratic Backsliding,” which supported development of this paper. Special thanks to colleagues who shared their data with us and provided helpful feedback on the paper, and to Staffan Lindberg and the Varieties of Democracy Institute for including these findings in the working paper series.
    [Show full text]
  • Facade Democracy: Democratic Transition in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan
    University of Central Florida STARS Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 2004 Facade Democracy: Democratic Transition In Kazakhstan And Uzbekistan Robin Nicole Merritt University of Central Florida Part of the Political Science Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Masters Thesis (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STARS Citation Merritt, Robin Nicole, "Facade Democracy: Democratic Transition In Kazakhstan And Uzbekistan" (2004). Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 143. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/143 FAÇADE DEMOCRACY: DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION IN KAZAKHSTAN AND UZBEKISTAN by ROBIN NICOLE MERRITT B.A. University of Central Florida, 1999 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Department of Political Science in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Summer Term 2004 © 2004 Robin Nicole Merritt ii ABSTRACT This thesis explores the reasons behind the stagnation in the transition to democracy in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. According to their constitutions, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan are democracies. In actuality, however, there is little evidence to support that these are democratic systems. These states’ post-Soviet constitutions outline them as democracies – yet they lack a free press; freedom of association is suppressed; religious freedom is limited; and free speech is constrained as well. While these two countries hold popular elections, much of their electoral processes are under the control of the executive branch of government - calling into question whether or not Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan really hold “fair and competitive” elections.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy in Crisis: Corruption, Media, and Power in Turkey
    A Freedom House Special Report Democracy in Crisis: Corruption, Media, and Power in Turkey Susan Corke Andrew Finkel David J. Kramer Carla Anne Robbins Nate Schenkkan Executive Summary 1 Cover: Mustafa Ozer AFP / GettyImages Introduction 3 The Media Sector in Turkey 5 Historical Development 5 The Media in Crisis 8 How a History Magazine Fell Victim 10 to Self-Censorship Media Ownership and Dependency 12 Imprisonment and Detention 14 Prognosis 15 Recommendations 16 Turkey 16 European Union 17 United States 17 About the Authors Susan Corke is Andrew Finkel David J. Kramer Carla Anne Robbins Nate Schenkkan director for Eurasia is a journalist based is president of Freedom is clinical professor is a program officer programs at Freedom in Turkey since 1989, House. Prior to joining of national security at Freedom House, House. Ms. Corke contributing regularly Freedom House in studies at Baruch covering Central spent seven years at to The Daily Telegraph, 2010, he was a Senior College/CUNY’s School Asia and Turkey. the State Department, The Times, The Transatlantic Fellow at of Public Affairs and He previously worked including as Deputy Economist, TIME, the German Marshall an adjunct senior as a journalist Director for European and CNN. He has also Fund of the United States. fellow at the Council in Kazakhstan and Affairs in the Bureau written for Sabah, Mr. Kramer served as on Foreign Relations. Kyrgyzstan and of Democracy, Human Milliyet, and Taraf and Assistant Secretary of She was deputy editorial studied at Ankara Rights, and Labor. appears frequently on State for Democracy, page editor at University as a Critical Turkish television.
    [Show full text]
  • STIFLING the PUBLIC SPHERE: MEDIA and CIVIL SOCIETY in EGYPT Sherif Mansour
    Media and Civil Society in Egypt STIFLING THE PUBLIC SPHERE: MEDIA AND CIVIL SOCIETY IN EGYPT Sherif Mansour I. Overview More than four years after the dramatic events in Cairo’s Tahrir Square led to the resignation of President Hosni Mubarak and Egypt’s first-ever democratic elections, Egyptian civil society and independent media are once again struggling under military oppression. The July 2013 military takeover led by then-general, now- president Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has brought Egypt’s brief, imperfect political opening to an end. The Sisi regime’s goal is to return Egypt to the pre–Arab Spring status quo by restoring the state’s control over the public sphere. To this end, it is tightening the screws on civil society and reversing hard-won gains in press freedom. Civil society activists have been imprisoned, driven underground, or forced into exile. The sorts of lively conversations and fierce debates that were possible before the military takeover were pushed off the airwaves and the front pages, and even online refuges for free discussion are being closed through the use of surveillance and Internet trolls. Egypt’s uneven trajectory over the past several years is reflected in the rankings it has received from Freedom House’s Freedom of the Press report, which downgraded Egypt to Not Free in its 2011 edition, covering events in 2010. After the revolution in early 2011, Egypt improved to Partly Free. By the 2013 edition, it was Not Free once again. And this year, Egypt sunk to its worst press freedom score since 2004.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights Challenges
    TEN CRITICAL HUMAN RIGHTS CHALLENGES FOR THE NEXT AMERICAN PRESIDENT The Connect U.S. Fund The Connect U.S. Fund This paper is a product of Freedom House and the Connect US Fund and is endorsed by the following individuals and institutions: American Civil Liberties Union Human Rights First Amnesty International USA Human Rights Watch Better World Campaign Ambassador Mark P. Lagon International Relations Chair, Center for Justice and Accountability Georgetown University MSFS Program Center for Victims of Torture Physicians for Human Rights The Connect US Fund Project on Middle East Democracy The Enough Project Resolve Freedom House Eric Sapp Executive Director, American Values Network Futures Without Violence Ted Piccone Global Rights Brookings Institution Global Solutions United to End Genocide Global Witness Jennifer Windsor Associate Dean for Programs, Georgetown Chris Hennemeyer University School of Foreign Service International Development Consultant Index Introduction i Prioritize U.S Leadership on International Norms and Universality of Human Rights 1 Act to Prevent Genocide and Mass Atrocities and Ensure Accountability 2 Pursue Policies that Protect People from the Threat of Terrorism while Respecting Human Rights both at home and abroad 3 Oppose the Coordinated Global Assault on Civil Society, Including the Murder, Criminalization, and Vilification of Human Rights Defenders 4 Proactively Address the Democracy and Human Rights Opportunities and Challenges Presented by the Arab Uprisings 5 Ensure that Corporations Avoid Contributing
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom in the World 2019
    Democracy in Retreat FREEDOM IN THE WORLD 2019 Highlights from Freedom House’s annual report on political rights and civil liberties This report was made possible by the generous support of the Achelis & Bodman Foundation, the Jyllands-Posten Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the William & Sheila Konar Foundation, the Lilly Endowment, and the Fritt Ord Foundation. Freedom House is solely responsible for the report’s content. Freedom in the World 2019 Table of Contents Democracy in Retreat 1 Freedom in the World Methodology 2 Unpacking 13 Years of Decline 4 Regional Trends 9 Freedom in the World 2019 Map 14 Countries in the Spotlight 16 The Struggle Comes Home: Attacks on Democracy in the United States 18 The United States in Decline 23 Recommendations for Democracies 26 Recommendations for the Private Sector 28 The following people were instrumental in the writing of this booklet: Christopher Brandt, Isabel Linzer, Shannon O’Toole, Arch Puddington, Sarah Repucci, Tyler Roylance, Nate Schenkkan, Adrian Shahbaz, Amy Slipowitz, and Caitlin Watson. This booklet is a summary of findings for the 2019 edition of Freedom in the World. The complete analysis, including narrative reports on all countries and territories, can be found on our website at www.freedomhouse.org. ON THE COVER Cover image by KAL. FREEDOM IN THE WORLD 2019 Democracy in Retreat In 2018, Freedom in the World recorded the 13th consecutive year of decline in global freedom. The reversal has spanned a variety of countries in every region, from long-standing democracies like the United States to consolidated authoritarian regimes like China and Russia.
    [Show full text]