On the effectiveness of citizens’ alliances to defend democracy

Some populist governments have made citizens’ rights insecure and abrogated others. Some populist parties make citizens worry about their democratic rights and institutions because of an ambiguous commitment to democratic norms and principles. Populist parties and governments have been met with different kinds of responses in different countries. In Hungary and Poland civil society have mobilized to different degrees against populist governments. Sometimes they have been joined by (former) civil servants, such as judges or public prosecutors, who have been the victims of reforms of the basic institutions of their state. Civil society organizations have appealed to supranational and international institutions to intervene against domestic democratic backsliding. Supranational institutions such as the EU and the Council of Europe have tried to exert influence on democratically backsliding member states. In Germany, the AfD has been targeted by groups of citizens, who are concerned that the AfD constitute a threat against the constitutional order of Germany. Citizens have actively tried to create alliances with public organizations and civil servants to marginalize AfD politically. These examples raise the questions: What can citizens legitimately do to defend their rights? What are the role of civil servants working in public organizations tasked with protecting the fundamental principles of the political and legal order? What are the boundaries if any of alliances between public authorities and citizens created to protect and restore the rights of citizens against encroachments by populist governments and parties? This paper looks at these questions. Of particular interest is the problem of the effectiveness of citizens’ reactions to populist since such reactions are difficult to justify if they themselves conflict with the very democratic norms and principles they are supposed to defend and restore.