Pro-democracy protesters march on 10 December 2020 in Bangkok, Thailand. Photo by Lauren DeCicca/Getty Images 2021 State of Civil Society Report DEMOCRACY UNDER THE PANDEMIC In 2020, democratic freedoms came under renewed strain in many countries. sources as ‘fake news’; vastly extending surveillance, in the name of controlling The context was one of closing civic space in countries around the world, with the virus; and ramping up security force powers to criminalise and violently attacks by state and non-state forces on the key civic freedoms, of association, police breaches of pandemic regulations. peaceful assembly and expression, on which civil society relies. By the end of 2020, 87 per cent↗ of the world’s people were living with severe restrictions Wherever this happened, it made it harder to exercise democratic freedoms: on civic space, with some states using the pandemic as a pretext to introduce not only people’s ability to have their vote count in the year’s many elections, new restrictions that had nothing to do with fighting the virus and everything but also their ability to express dissent, question and even mock those in power, with extending state powers and reducing the space for accountability, dialogue and advance political alternatives. There should have been no incompatibility and dissent. Typically, states extended their powers under the pandemic by between fighting the virus and practising democracy, but sadly that was often increasing censorship, often making themselves the sole arbiters of truth the case, in a year that saw many flawed elections, and in which people risked about the pandemic and criminalising discussion of the pandemic by non-state repression when protesting to demand democratic freedoms. Pro-democracy protest in Minsk, Belarus on 16 August 2020. Photo by Getty Images/Getty Images 185 2021 STATE OF CIVIL SOCIETY REPORT DEMOCRACY UNDER THE PANDEMIC ELECTIONS IN THE PANDEMIC YEAR One of the key conditions of democracy is that there should be regular free regardless of voter safety, as seemed to be the case in Poland, Singapore and Sri and fair elections in which there is genuine choice and debate and incumbents Lanka, or delay them to their advantage, as incumbent governments in Bolivia stand a chance of losing. In 2020, there came another test, of holding elections and Malawi were accused of doing. Some countries introduced bans on public during the pandemic where people did not feel they had to risk their lives to meetings but political parties, particularly ruling parties, flouted them, as seen have their say. In every global region elections postponed until after viral peaks in Tanzania and Uganda. Where normal public campaigning was put on hold, had passed: elections in at least 75 countries and territories↗ were reported ruling parties could gain a distinct advantage through their close connections to have been delayed. Some governments proved it was possible to hold with public media, leaving opposition parties trying to develop new online elections in conditions that mitigated the risk of contagion. Such was the case campaigning skills. In numerous cases – including the Dominican Republic and in New Zealand and South Korea, where the smooth management of distanced Poland – incumbents tried to capitalise on and politicise their role of leading and sanitised elections was consistent with governments’ broadly efficient and pandemic response, albeit unsuccessfully in the Dominican Republic. effective pandemic response, which voters seemed to reward with increased support for incumbents. In many contexts the authorities made efforts to make voting safer, including through distanced queues, mask use and sanitisation of voting stations, but But these were sadly rare examples. Sometimes the circumstances of the this was not always the case. There were mixed levels of experimentation with pandemic led to disputes about the timings of elections, with incumbents remote voting methods, which were sometimes met with distrust, particularly seeking variously to hurry votes to take place at times that suited them, where incumbents felt they stood to lose from online or postal voting and so deliberately stoked suspicion. In the USA, for example, attempts to deny people alternate means of voting ere nakedly partisan in nature, albeit unable to prevent change. By the second half of 2020, at a time when the virus was in temporary retreat in many places, a body of good practice↗ had emerged as to how elections could be held safely and securely under pandemic conditions, encompassing neutrality about any restrictions placed on political meetings, enhanced sanitation and safety checks, the provision of alternate voting means and extended voting times to reduce crowding, the dissemination of clear information on how to vote safely, and the avoidance of any last-minute changes that might confuse people or cause conflict. To not follow that practice became a largely political choice. In essence, the pandemic provided a stress test of the willingness and capacities of states to hold free and fair elections, and too often, performance was at best mixed. A woman has her temperature checked upon her arrival to cast her vote in the In most countries civil society typically plays a major role around elections, parliamentary election held on 15 April 2020 in Seoul, South Korea. Photo by Chung Sung- including through educating voters and encouraging them to vote, putting Jun/Getty Images advocacy asks to parties and candidates and observing and scrutinising the 186 2021 STATE OF CIVIL SOCIETY REPORT DEMOCRACY UNDER THE PANDEMIC conduct of the electoral process, including voting and vote counting. But under the 2019 parliamentary election, not a single opposition candidate was able to the pandemic, those roles were constrained, and in country after country, civil win a seat. society was left frustrated by its inability to play a full and proper part. Once the pandemic is passed, civil society will expect to reclaim these roles and will But in 2020, not all went to plan as a credible opposition candidate emerged. not be content to stay on the sidelines. Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya had not planned to stand until her husband, pro- democracy activist Sergei Tikhanovsky, was arrested in May shortly after When it came to election results, 2020 had it all: in some contexts – Dominican announcing his intention to run in the election and his candidacy was duly Republic and the Seychelles – elections marked an overturning of long- turned down. He was arrested again later in May while campaigning for his established orders as parties long confined to opposition won power. In Malawi, wife and remains in detention at the time of writing. With no prior political a change of government came only after legal action annulled the first unfair experience, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya stepped forward and offered an unusual election result, marking an important landmark for upholding standards of threat to President Lukashenko, running as an outsider with a campaign that free and fair elections. The defeat of President Trump in the USA offered hope caught the popular imagination. Lukashenko must initially have sensed no that the toxic tide of right-wing populism and nationalism could be turned, threat from a candidate unused to campaigning, but came to realise he had but across Europe – not just in Poland but also in countries such as Serbia underestimated her. Tsikhanouskaya’s campaign galvanised dissent that might and Slovenia – far-right forces gained power and grew in confidence, sowing otherwise have been only quietly expressed, helping people overcome their division and attacking civil society. fear and giving them an opportunity to speak up, often for the first time. Anger↗ at economic decline met with outrage at the government’s handling of Elsewhere, as in Russia, Uganda and a swathe of West African states, including the pandemic, with the government having largely ignored the virus and failed Guinea and Togo, voting offered only the most rudimentary rubber stamp on to protect people. Lukashenko’s response was to rig the election. the intentions of entrenched rulers. Elections sometimes came after presidents rewrote constitutions to enable their continuing power. Some elections, Ahead of the election, the government arrested↗ several opposition including in Belarus and Kyrgyzstan, were clearly stolen by incumbents refusing candidates, journalists and bloggers↗, seeking to suppress dissent and evade to submit to a democratic verdict, leading to protests that in Kyrgyzstan ejected scrutiny. Viktar Babaryka, who had been the opposition front-runner, had his those who had claimed victory, and in Mali unleashing anger that paved candidacy blocked in June and was detained in July. Additional restrictions were the way for a military coup. In too many places elections offered ceremony placed on protests, making it easier for permission to be refused. Hundreds of without substance, and when the mask slipped and people demanded proper people were detained in protests in the months leading up to the election, democratic freedoms, brutal repression often ensued. including journalists covering protests. Several members of Tsikhanouskaya’s campaign staff were arrested before the election, while she went into hiding. Belarus: people decry As the vote went ahead, the internet was shut down in the capital, Minsk. The only opinion polls that were allowed were those run by the state. Voting a stolen election went ahead without the presence of any credible international observers; Alexander Lukashenko, President of Belarus, must have expected the August the Council of Europe and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in presidential election to be business as usual. After all, he has been president Europe (OSCE) had accreditation denied when they tried to send observers, since 1994, when he won the country’s first vote since the break-up of the while observers from Azerbaijan and Russia, both allies of Belarus, were hardly Soviet Union. That was also the last Belarus election to be considered free and likely to be neutral.