Click to hear #citizenvoices?

ABOVE: Police use teargas and water cannons to disperse protesters in Taksim Square, Istanbul, 6 July 2013

Credit: Murad Sezer/Reuters

Political movements which once fought for freedom and prosperity are now trying to close down debate in the name of stabilising new democracies, while internet restrictions stymie people’s power to fight back, says Dhananjayan Sriskandarajah

We live in a time of momentous change, particularly when it comes to communications. The internet and mobile revolutions hold great promise for people to connect with each other, not just to socialise but also to mobilise. They create unprecedented opportunities to hold governments to account by opening up official data and popular monitoring of service delivery (imagine Tripadvisor for public services), and facilitating forms of direct democracy that would have been unimaginable even a couple of decades ago.

The numbers behind the trends are staggering. Any day now there will be more active mobile phones on the planet than there are people; two billion of us already have mobile broadband subscriptions. Global internet traffic is growing at a compound annual growth rate of 23 per cent, and there are already billions of devices connected to the internet gathering and generating vast amounts of data.

All this holds huge potential for citizens. Way back in 2001, we saw text messages helping to mobilise mass protests against the president of the Philippines (who called his ousting the “coup de text”). In 2007, ushahidi.com helped citizens monitor election violence in Kenya and, more recently, there was the amazing use of the internet and social media during the Arab Spring protests.

Yet amidst this euphoria there are signs that, despite having ever-increasing access to the tools to have their voices heard, there are still millions around the world who are not being heard or whose voice simply doesn’t count. Indeed, the gap between the potential for amplified citizen voice and the reality of large numbers of marginalised voices seems to be increasing.

while solidarity and unity are crucial during liberation struggles, debate and dissent are vital to promote both vibrant democracies and economic prosperity

We know that in the developed world, new technologies and social media have not necessarily broadened participation, with a vocal minority dominating communication channels. If we look across the rest of the world, there are serious threats to citizen participation – from poverty, and from repressive regimes, to cynical ways in which emancipatory technologies are being used against activists. We have a long way to go before we truly liberate citizens’ voices around the world.

Barriers to being heard

Globally, the greatest barrier to citizen participation remains poverty. Around half the world’s population lives on less than US$2.50 a day and one in four of us on this planet does not have access to electricity. The fact that there are more mobile phones than flushing toilets around the world may be a reminder of how prevalent new technologies have become but also a reminder that the lack of some basic old technologies severely limits the ability of many people to live full lives and exercise active citizenship.

The gap in connectivity is also palpable. Some three-quarters of people in the developed world have mobile internet connections, allowing them to access unfathomable amounts of information and connect with unfathomable numbers of people instantly. Yet only 10 per cent of Africans enjoy such access.

Worst of all, the voices of the poor do not even feature where they ought to. For example, in recent discussions about what will replace the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) when they “expire” at the end of 2015, there were numerous public consultations – many held in the nicest hotels in the most exotic locations – but there were few opportunities for the people who are supposed to be the beneficiaries of such “development” to shape priorities. Examples such as the Participate Initiative (an attempt to collate the lessons of participatory exercises involving the poor) and My World 2015 (a large-scale survey) are rare examples of gathering citizens’ voices to inform and influence global decision-making.

In many parts of the world, even where people have the necessary means and tools, the space in which citizens can speak up or mobilise is being threatened.

The situation in many African countries is particularly acute, especially where political movements that once fought for freedom and prosperity, having assumed power, are now trying to clamp down on civic space. What they ignore at their peril is that, while solidarity and unity are crucial during liberation struggles, debate and dissent are vital to promote both vibrant democracies and economic prosperity.

Across the continent, we are told that “young democracies” or countries with a “fragile peace” could easily be destabilised if the government were to loosen its grip on civic space. In Zimbabwe, the activities of local civil society organisations are attacked because they are allegedly plotting regime change on behalf of foreign governments. In Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda the state has the power to de-register a civil society organisation without reason and without the intermediation of a court of law. In Ethiopia, groups that receive more than 10 per cent of funding from foreign sources cannot undertake advocacy or human rights work.

The potential of arguably the most liberating tool for citizen voice – the internet – is also under threat from new restrictions that clamp down on the ability of citizens to mobilise or hold governments to account. Not only do citizens of many countries face some kind of restriction on their online freedoms, but in some countries governments are leaving internet access open but are monitoring activity and dissent. They allow online freedom of expression but use the evidence – often gathered through online surveillance – to round up, jail and sometimes attack people who dare to disagree.

Protest and participation

Another area of concern is how governments react to popular protests. In many countries around the world, governments are failing one of the fundamental tests of a working democracy, namely how they respond to protests. In Cambodia, land rights activists opposing official plans to forcibly acquire land for big companies have been subjected to brutal attacks by security forces and lengthy prison terms. In Honduras, peasant farmer groups involved in land disputes with companies have been subjected to murderous attacks. In India, peaceful activists ideologically opposed to the government’s economic policy have been charged, under draconian laws, of being members of outlawed terrorist organisations. In Canada, non-profit groups opposed to the conservative government’s policy of loosening environmental restrictions to enable extraction of oil and gas from ecologically sensitive zones have been subjected to surveillance and funding cuts while being accused of obstructing the country’s economic development.

In some cases, the rhetoric about protests is just as worrying as what actually happens to the protestors. The Turkish Prime Minister’s dismissal of mass protests in Taksim Square in June 2013 as being led by a handful of looters and vandals, manipulated by foreign forces, is typical of how leaders refuse to treat citizens’ grievances with the respect they deserve. Western leaders have similarly dismissed the Occupy movement and indignados as fringe elements without clear vision or majority support.

In Cambodia, land rights activists opposing official plans to forcibly acquire land for big companies have been subjected to brutal attacks by security forces and lengthy prison terms

Here lies the challenge for those of us interested in promoting citizen voice around the world. We live in an era where it is easier and cheaper than ever before to communicate; yet it is also an era in which the barriers to equal participation are as significant as ever. In some cases it is poverty that prevents people from having the wherewithal to be full members of the polity, in others it is the attacks on the space in which people can mobilise, and in yet others, where protests can and do happen, it is the lack of constructive response from those in power. It is little wonder then that when I talk to civil society leaders around the world that so many of them are pessimistic about the future.

I remain optimistic that we are at the cusp of a new era of citizen participation. History teaches us that it is futile for governments to curb people’s freedoms. It is a question of when, not if, citizens rise up to challenge and often overthrow political systems in which their rights are curtailed. New technologies are making it easier to access information, connect with other like-minded people, and mobilise large numbers of people. Over time, the use of these technologies will close the gap between the potential for magnifying citizen’s voices, including marginalised groups, and today’s reality of listening to the loud few. These technologies will provide innovative ways for citizens to make their voices heard and to hold those in power to account. It may not be instant, but communications technology will continue to help revolutionise citizen action and amplify citizen voices. In the end, people power will prevail.

We are at the cusp of a new era of citizen participation