Covid-19 pandemic enabled governments to tighten authoritarian controls
Research Essay by Subateeswarran Looganaden (Awarded First Class)
Introduction
Due to the nature of the Covid-19 pandemic which constantly presents a disastrous threat to public health, economy, and labour markets; governments worldwide have undertaken drastic disease containment mechanisms to combat the spread of virus. This has become a complicated trade-off between securing public health and guarding fundamental democratic principles (Sarah Engler, 2021). Analysts find that the worldwide health-crisis have exacerbated the crisis of global democracy as, it provides governments’ pathways to consolidate power by tightening authoritarian controls. Although, there are no standard methods to measure autocratization; data and statistics from Freedom House and V-Dem; aid in distinguishing and demonstrating democratic backsliding that previously existed and that are further heighten by pandemic conditions (Pelke et al, 2021). Their research indicates that more than 66% (114) of governments have committed major pandemic violations and it was more prevalent in authoritarian and hybrid regimes when compared to democracies (V-Dem, 2021 & International IDEAS, 2021).
Authoritarian control in the present context is characterized as highly centralized and untransparent government decision-making that adopts excessive draconian disease preventive policies which restrict civil liberties, basic freedoms and disrupts electoral procedures (Bachelet, 2020). It could be argued that, under the aegis of securing public health interests, state actors from non-democratic / illiberal governments along liberal democracies have curtail human rights and disregard the checks and balance of powers (James Lamond, 2020). This essay intends to discover the methods and the extent to which governments have used Covid-19 pandemic conditions to further strengthen authoritarian controls and undermine global freedom, referring case studies of Taiwan, South Korea, India, Hungary, China and Russia.
Authoritarian controls in Consolidated Free democracies?
Taiwan and South Korea have implemented authoritative control measures by employing digital surveillance tools that infringe privacy of citizens nevertheless, they are lauded as exemplary models in combating the virus (Sarah Repucci, Amy Slipowitz, 2021). Reason being their emergency provisions such as contact tracing, lockdown, physical distancing, and legal mask mandate, were necessary to mitigate the risks of transmission and didn’t violate international standards or democratic benchmark based on international human rights laws and Siracusa Principles (Stephen & Eric 2020). Just as wealthy democracies like New Zealand, Finland, and Canada; these consolidated free democracies have strong civil societies and robust institutional pillars, that ensured accountability, transparency and kept power in check (V-Dem, 2021).
South Korea & Taiwan have breached down autocratization and prevented violations by enacting stringent democracy-protective pandemic policies. To ensure protection of personal data both regimens crafted well-regulated safeguards and bureaucratic scope limits on data collection, that prevented misuse of temporarily limited health surveillance & tracking mechanisms (Greitens, 2020). Since, South Korea and Taiwan have had authoritarian history and have experienced outbreaks such as MERS (2015) and SARS (2013), they have learned the significance of transparency, countering misinformation, and are aware about authoritarian surveillance that may potentially undermine democratic values (Caroline, 2020).
Populism — Autocratization threating Democracies
Covid -19 pandemic is deepening and accelerating the erosion of global freedom as illiberal or flawed democracies such as India, Hungary, Philippines, Brazil, and the United States have seen populist leaders that exploit the health crisis as a political tool to further consolidate power and supress dissent by removing checks on power and weaken oppositions (Larry Diamond,2020 & Anna, 2020). Right-wing nationalists failed to curb Covid-19 pandemic as India is reported to possess the highest Covid-19 caseloads and death cases in the world, while Hungary despite starting with less cases, currently it reports to have the highest death rate from Covid-19 (Zoltan, 2021). Democratically elected authoritarian-minded populist leaders such as Narendra Modi, and Viktor Orbán have politicized the pandemic to further polarize and divide societies by imposing emergency policies that violates rule of law (Sarah Repucci, Amy Slipowitz, 2020).
India and Hungary were once considered stable democracies but it’s facing steep decline in liberal democratic index (LDI); after encountering autocratization, its status dropped from Electoral Democracy to Electoral Autocracy. India’s (LDI) recorded 0.57 in 2010, after BJP’s victory in 2014 and Modi’s abuse of power in 2020, the (LDI) records 0.34 in 2020. Before Fidesz took power in 2010 elections, Hungary’s (LDI) recorded 0.68, after, Orbán’s constitutional reforms, the (LDI) in 2020 was 0.37 (V-Dem, 2021). Populist regimes have prioritized domestic battles and downplayed the severity of virus by mobilizing prejudice against minority groups and disseminating false news. Freedom of expressions is under threat in these states, as they have imposed press and media censorship and suppressed right to protest and freedom of speech which deemed to tarnish image of the government (Joshua, 2021).
India
Modi’s Hindu-nationalist government use the pretext of Covid-19 pandemic to tighten authoritarian control and undermine free media in India (Faria, 2020) by prosecuting critical journalists and intellectuals who attempted to question and disproof government policies and claims (Samar, 2021). The police registered cases and arrested journalists under sedition act for reporting Covid 19 lockdown that displaced migrants; they classified these reports as fake by invoking the Disaster Management Act (Human Rights Watch, 2020). Moreover, the government suspended effective democratic controls by cancelling Question Hour in parliament, citing the pandemic as an excuse, to eliminate any forms of accountability (Rajeev, 2020). Also, it detained hundreds of non — violent (anti — CAA) protestors under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act in 2019 (Murali,2020,) as for the Farmers protest, Modi announced 3-week lockdown that conveniently hampered public protests (Amnesty International, 2021).
The party exacerbated religious tensions in India by extending discrimination against minority Muslim groups by passing the Citizenship Amendment Act in Indian parliament which violates the constitution as it discriminates Muslim refugees (Devjyot , 2019). They often labelled Muslims as super-spreaders, campaigned to boycott Muslim businesses and the government has harassed front liners based on religion and ethnicity (Ellis-Petersen and Rahman 2020). India’s restrictive press laws demands news organisations to maintain positive coverage of government as the government forces local medias to adhere to official versions of Covid reports and pressures Twitter to delete tweets related to farmer’s protests (Sebastian et al, 2020). Moreover, Covid Emergency measures enabled state government of Karnataka to force quarantined citizens to update their photos, home addresses. Those information were published, under Epidemic Diseases Act 1897, violating privacy of citizens (Asian Law Centre, 2020, Thomas et al, 2020).
Hungary
The Fidesz party had previously enacted repressive laws that curtail freedom of expression, and suppressed roles of civic society (Matthijs Bogaards 2018.) Orban restricted academic pluralism and achieved greater control of media by forming pro-government national media outlets (Sebastian Hellmeier et al, 2020). He had forced many judges to retire and replaced them with his friends in the judicial department (Lydia, 2018); also, by gearing economic nationalism he extended control over financial institutions (Sebők & Jasper, 2021). Viktor Orban’s control over Hungary is practically complete nevertheless, the illiberal hybrid regime has further strengthened their grip on power by weaponizing Covid-19 by placing draconian provisions that restrict political freedoms (Megan Cox, 2020). Even before the surge in covid cases, Viktor Orban took advantage of Fidesz’s parliamentary majority to declare state of emergency and enacted the “Draft Law on Protecting Against the Coronavirus” (Kelly & Kylie, 2020). This allows him to suspend existing laws, sideline parliament, issue fines for any protestors and rule by decree for indefinite time (Elisabeth Zerofsky, 2020). Moreover, Hungary may imprison any journalists or critics up to five years; if it finds the news disseminated was “false” or if it obstructs government’s efforts, even if it’s a Facebook post (Gábor Halmai, 2020).
Also, the government suspends all elections and referenda under the Act on the Containment of Coronavirus and the elected representatives may continue even after their term of service expires (Library of Congress, 2020). After the EU warned the Hungarian government to not undermine liberal principles (Aljazeera, 2020) the order was revoked. However, newly passed bills still enable Orban, continual and unrestricted rule by decree for 6 months by extending public health emergency (Stephen & Eric 2020). Furthermore, Orban halted subsides for all opposing political parties by redirecting tax revenues away from municipalities led by opposition (Amy Slipowitz, 2021 and Valerie Hopkins, 2020) and campaigned that oppositions were anti-vaccine groups to weaken them before 2022 elections (Benjamin Novak, 2020). Finally, Hungarian military intervention has alarmed concerns as currently, the healthcare departments are under military supervision also, many military control units have been dispatched to support key companies deemed to be strategic importance (Kriszta Kovács, 2021).
Covid 19 and Digital Authoritarian Regime: China & Russia
China and Russia are currently the most prominent repressive authoritarian regimes; threatening global freedom in the world as the governments’ have severely undermined rule of law, restricted civil liberties, and tightened control over the state institutions, justice systems and media. China and Russia have been heavily condemned for often utilizing aggressive policies and laws to intimidate and silence dissent. CCP continues repression against religious and ethnic minorities such as the Uighurs and Russia had resumes torturing opposing politicians such as poisoning, Alexei Navalny even during the pandemic (The Economist, 2021 & Simon Lewis, Daphne Psaledakis, 2021).
China and Russia, both corrupted digital authoritarian regimes are using the pandemic as pretext for further power grab by deploying sophisticated mass surveillance technologies such as facial recognition software, linked to temperature-checking apps, geolocation tracking, CCTV surveillance, and drone cameras to police self-quarantine and fine those who non-comply (Mary, 2020, Lydia , 2020, Alina and Chris, 2019). In the context of emergency, Putin and Xi’s government have under-reported Covid-19 cases and enacted major censorship laws that criminalize any reports that critic or challenge governments’ narrative. Many independent journalists, lawyers, human rights activists, and health workers have been harassed and detained by Chinese and Russian authorities for sharing information or spreading alleged rumours about Covid-19 under the Chinese Criminal Law and Russian fake news law (Amnesty International, 2020).
CCP’s censorship withheld crucial information that could have downsized the global impact of Covid-19, pointing to the case of whistle-blower Dr. Li Wenliang, who tried to warn about the virus much earlier but was detained and silenced. It targeted Muslim and African minorities for Covid testing and threw them into detention camps under mass surveillance and imposed forced labour. China enacted extreme lockdown policies that isolated children from families in Wuhan, forced residents Xinjiang to take traditional medicines and harassed home-quarantine violators. It forced more than 800,000 people to quarantine in isolated areas claiming to be equipped with hospital facilities to end emergency measures quickly (Kenneth Roth, 2020, Tobias and Romaniuk, 2020).
Power grab, citing the Covid-19, can be observed in Russia as Vladimir Putin approved legislation on extending presidential term limits; enabling him to run for two more six-year presidential terms, if elected 2 times, Putin may hold power till 2036. He claims that stability in governance is required to fight covid and the party has ceased even single-person protests that obstruct their agenda. Russia’s judiciary system is also greatly affected by complex series of constitutional amendments that took place, with the aid of upper chamber of parliament. Moreover, Russian state media has heavily invested in disinformation campaign that blames the west and capitalists for spreading the virus and exploiting the crisis. These amplifies concerns amongst public and strengthens Putin’s position (Moscow Times, 2021, International Press Institute, 2020, Yaroslav Shevchenko, 2020).
Conclusion
Realizing that during existential crisis, citizens are more unreluctantly accepting power grabs, many incumbent administrations abused their power to consolidate more influence, silence opposing criticism and violate international democratic standards (Kenneth, 2020). Moreover, prior to the pandemic, declines in civil liberties was already prevalent, as civil societies and free media were unable to hold governments accountable. However, the effects of autocratization during pandemic have further accelerated the global trend of shrinking civic space and led to mass citizens uprisings, increased global discontent, discrimination, and inequality (Bethke et al, 2020 & International IDEA, 2020). Critics fear that these precedent emergency measures can be utilized for future crises under authoritarian governance (John Glenn, 2021). Hence, the case study presented approves the claims of analysts; that covid-19 enabled many governments to strengthen their grip on state power.
