by There are several systems of government and for the purpose of clarity and driving the point home, a brief mention is hereby presented in the next paragraph.
Monarchy: The King or the Queen or the Royal family holds power.
Oligarchy: Power is held by a few.
Theocracy: Power is vested in the religious authority.
Dictatorship: An Individual or a few are in absolute control.
Democracy: Power lies with the people either directly or through elected representatives.
The essence of this discourse is a deconstruction of both Democracy and Dictatorship.
In a Democracy,a leader with the mindset of the King of the jungle can be tamed to conform to civility. In a Dictatorship a dove can become a monster.
The consensus of arguments rate Democracy as the system that not only protect individual rights and freedom, but also have in its pack, rule of law that should ideally apply to everyone.
Peaceful transfer of power makes the constitutional power granted to a leader a transient one.
Accountability and transparency are another solid pillar in a Democracy because of checks and balances that rested on a tripod of legislature, the judiciary, and the press often referred to as the fourth estate of the realm.
Additional beauty of Democracy is the participation and engagement of the people as stake holders in an entity.
Fact of the matter about Democracy in developing and underdeveloped worlds are that:
1. Power in the hands of a Demagogue is open to manipulation due to lack of awareness.
2. Religion, ethnicity, poverty also undermine the proper functioning of Democracy.
3. External influence and interest of foreign concerns in the natural resources of some of the third world countries contribute encumbrances to the proper functioning of Democracy.
Despite all the shortcomings inherent in a Democracy, the gravest sin practitioners and stakeholders can commit is to pervert the wishes and choices of the electorate, it is tantamount to a coup d’etat if not more gravious. And it is often the reasons opportunists seize to justify a pitch.
We may even ask, is there enough justification for a forcefully takeover of government?
In all honesty, this is a super complex and contentious issue that is devoid of a straightforward answer.
A school of thought believes there can be justification in extreme circumstances such as widespread violence and genocide; complete breakdown of law and order; severe corruption or abuse of power; and external threats to the Sovereignty of a country.
In conclusion, the reasons for a forceful takeover of government can also be super subjective. And more often than not, coups do lead to more harm and instability thereby negating the veiled objective.
Faithfulness to the instrument of the code, which in this case is the constitution on the part of the elected is not only a desideratum but also sacrosanct. If that faithfulness is sustained, coup d’etat is tantamount to banditry attack on a cohesive community.
