Skip to content

DA1. Compare Athenian and Modern Democracy

Statement

Reflect on the various structures of Athenian democracy and compare them with the system of government in your own country. You may consider the following aspects:

  • Citizenship and franchise
  • The procedure to make laws and who had the power to do so
  • The Power of the Judiciary
  • Judicial Review
  • Ways of constraining the power of public officials

Answer

Athene was the birthplace of democracy, as it was the first city-state that allowed the majority of its citizens to participate in politics and decision-making. This text will compare the Athenian democracy at its golden age (between the fifth and fourth centuries BCE) with the modern democracy of Syria. The modern-day democracy that is spread worldwide figures the Athenian democracy, but it is in no way similar to it, as the thousands of years of evolution and technological advancements have their impact on the system.

Citizenship in Athens was only granted by birth to an Athenian father; women, children, slaves, and foreigners were not considered citizens and there was no possible route to get citizenship for them (Rothchild, 2007). In Syria, citizenship is granted by birth to a Syrian father only (similar to Athene); there are no slaves and women and children are considered citizens from birth. Foreigners (born outside of Syria or inside to non-Syrian parents) can apply for citizenship but the process is complex and rarely successful (Freedom House, 2020).

Franchise in Athens was granted to all citizens over the age of 18; but due to citizenship restrictions, only 10% of the population had the right to vote. In Syria, the franchise is granted to all citizens over the age of 18; the percentage of the population that can vote is 100% of adult citizens; but in reality, elections are rigged and one party has been ruling the country for 60 years (Freedom House, 2020).

The procedure to make laws in Athens was done by the Assembly, which was open to all citizens; there was the council of 500 that served as the main legislative body; the council prepared the laws and passed them to the Assembly to be voted on, and if the majority of the Assembly voted in favor, the law was passed. In Syria, the procedure to make laws is done by the Parliament (also known as the People’s Assembly), which is elected by the people; the Parliament has the power to make laws and hold the government accountable; however, the constitution gives the power to the president to make laws by decree, and can only be overruled by a two-thirds majority in the Parliament (Syrian Law Journal, 2014). The term of the Parliament in Syria is 4 years, while in Athens, the term of the council of 500 was 1 year.

The Power of the Judiciary in Athens was limited; the jurors’ panel was selected from the jurors’ pool where they served for one year; the judges were not professional and had no legal training; the trials lasted only one day with no formal lawyers but the defendant themselves; the jurors decide the verdict by voting (Rothchild, 2007). In Syria, the judiciary is independent; the judges are professional are must graduate from law school and then do further multi-year training; there is the Supreme Judicial Council that oversees the judiciary and appoints judges; the trials can last for years and the defendant has the right to a lawyer; the verdict is decided by the judge, not the jurors (Syrian Law Journal, 2014).

Judicial Review in Athens was not present; the laws were made by the Assembly and the council of 500, and there was no way to challenge the laws in court. In Syria, the Supreme Court has the power of judicial review along with other Appeals Courts (Syrian Law Journal, 2014).

Ways of constraining the power of public officials in Athens were through the process of impeachment as the Assembly voted on public officials and they were stripped of their power and citizenship rights if found guilty (Rothchild, 2007). In Syria, the Parliament has the power to remove the president from office if they are found guilty of corruption or abuse of power; but this has never happened in the history of the country.

In conclusion, the Athenian democracy had its flaws but it was good for its time; on the other hand, the modern democracy in Syria looks perfect on paper, but in reality, it is a dictatorship where elections are rigged and the justice system is disabled.

References

‌