Can all the efforts devoted to capacity building in the sphere of civil society in new democracies be justified?
- Civil society is a main actor to promote the resilience of democracy because it enhances democratic principles and symbolizes a well monitoring system of young regimes
- Civil society is a mean to improve the representation of popular sovereignty and to enhance other democratic principles
- Civil society has also an expertise function which can be useful for a democratic government
- Civil society is a counter power which ensures the respect of democracy by the governments
- Civil society is a muddled and flexible boundaries concept which may have vicious and harmful emergent effects, jeopardizing the democratic nature of countries
- Civil society is a complex, dynamic and dullness concept
- The harmful aspects of civil society in democracy promotion
- Civil society has been used by the international assistance as a way to legitimate their actions
Civil society appears as a main actor of the implementation and the resilience of democracy. Indeed, it enables citizens to participate more actively in public current debate and symbolizes a well mean of integration. Civil society fosters the circulation of information in the society, standing for a role of relay and of collective pedagogy. This is the illustration of social and democratic progress from people in contrast with the elitist social shift. Citizens, more educated and acquainted about current phenomena and issues, do not consider the state as the exclusive decider. Civil society plays a part in the anticipation and alarming role in order to prevent the abuse of governmental persons in charge. It can also ensure the function of counter power against state excesses. Tocqueville, in ?Democracy in America', emphasized the importance of these counter powers to promote the well being of new democracies. Civil society has been developed against the state, involving itself in domains in which state has been absent or not enough efficient. The relationship between these two actors has been punctuated by different stages : reciprocal ignorance, total integration, influence or negotiation. The political power is the actor which decides the law and establishes the common rule. The civil society is the one which influences and orientates the political decider. However, the civil society has not always fulfilled this function of control and alarming actor vis-à-vis the state. Actually, the relationship between both actors has also been a scene of help and cooperation. The state can evaluate the diverse forces in the society through this new shape of representation and call upon expertise services of associations and organizations on particular concerns. Thus, one may assert that "there cannot be an efficient state alongside a weak civil society?.