Countries at the Crossroads is an annual analysis of
government performance in 70 strategically important countries
worldwide that are at a critical crossroads in determining their
political future. The in-depth comparative analyses and
quantitative ratings—examining government accountability, civil
liberties, rule of law, and anticorruption and transparency
efforts—are intended to help international policymakers identify
areas of progress, as well as to highlight areas of concern that
could be addressed in diplomatic efforts and reform assistance. A
new edition of Crossroads is published each year, with
approximately half of the 70 countries analyzed in odd-numbered
years and the other half in even-numbered years.
The 2010 edition is the fifth in the Countries at the
Crossroads series. It evaluates 21 of the countries last
examined in the 2006 edition, providing an opportunity for time
series analysis and assessment of the extent to which this group of
countries is backsliding, stalling, or improving in terms of
democratic governance. The time frame for events covered by the
country scores is December 1, 2005 through May 31, 2009. In
addition, 11 countries are included in the analysis for the first
time.
In cooperation with a team of methodology experts, Freedom
House designed a methodology that includes a questionnaire used
both to prepare analytical narratives and for numerical ratings for
each government. The methodology provides authors with a
transparent and consistent guide to scoring and analyzing the
countries under review, and uses identical benchmarks for both
narratives and ratings, rendering the two indicators mutually
reinforcing. The final result is a system of comparative ratings
accompanied by narratives that reflect governments’ commitment to
passing good laws and also their records on upholding
them.
Freedom House enlisted the participation of prominent scholars
and analysts to author the publication’s country reports. In
preparing the written analyses with accompanying comparative
ratings, Freedom House undertook a systematic gathering of data.
Each country narrative report is approximately 7,000 words long.
Expert regional advisers reviewed the draft reports, providing
written comments and requests for revisions, additions, or
clarifications. Authors were asked to respond as fully as possible
to all of the questions posed when composing the analytical
narratives.
For all countries in the analysis, Freedom House, in
consultation with the report authors and academic advisers, has
provided detailed numerical ratings.
Authors produced a first round of ratings by assigning scores on a
scale of 0-7 for each of the 75 methodology questions, where 0
represents weakest performance and 7 represents strongest
performance. The scores were then aggregated into seventeen
subcategories and four main thematic areas. The regional advisers
and Freedom House staff systematically reviewed all country ratings
on a comparative basis to ensure accuracy and fairness. All final
ratings decisions rest with Freedom House.
In devising a framework for evaluating government performance,
Freedom House sought to develop a scale broad enough to capture
degrees of variation so that comparisons could be made between
countries in the current year, and also so that future time series
comparisons might be made to assess a country’s progress in these
areas relative to past performance. These scales achieve an
effective balance between a scoring system that is too broad—which
may make it difficult for analysts to make fine distinctions
between different scores—and one that is too narrow—which may make
it difficult to capture degrees of variation between countries and
therefore more difficult to recognize how much a given government’s
performance has improved or eroded over time.
Narrative essays and scoring were applied to the following
main areas of performance, which Freedom House considers to be key
to evaluating the state of democratic governance within a
country:
ACCOUNTABILITY AND PUBLIC VOICE
- Free and fair electoral laws and elections
- Effective and accountable government
- Civic engagement and civic monitoring
- Media independence and freedom of expression
CIVIL LIBERTIES
- Protection from state terror, unjustified imprisonment, and
torture
- Gender equity
- Rights of ethnic, religious, and other distinct groups
- Freedom of conscience and belief
- Freedom of association and assembly
RULE OF LAW
- Independent judiciary
- Primacy of rule of law in civil and criminal matters
- Accountability of security forces and military to civilian
authorities
- Protection of property rights
ANTICORRUPTION AND TRANSPARENCY
- Environment to protect against corruption
- Procedures and systems to enforce anticorruption laws
- Enforcement of anticorruption norms, standards, and
protections
- Governmental transparency
The analysis rates countries’ performance on each methodology
question on a scale of 0-7, with 0 representing the weakest
performance and 7 the strongest. The scoring scale is as
follows:
Score of 0–2: Countries that receive a score
of 0, 1, or 2 ensure no or very few adequate protections, legal
standards, or rights in the rated category. Laws protecting the
rights of citizens or the justice of the political process are
minimal, rarely enforced, or routinely abused by the
authorities.
Score of 3–4: Countries that receive a score
of 3 or 4 provide some adequate protections, legal standards, or
rights in the rated category. Legal protections are weak and
enforcement of the law is inconsistent or corrupt.
Score of 5: Countries that receive a score of
5 provide many adequate protections, legal standards or rights in
the rated category. Rights and political standards are protected,
but enforcement may be unreliable and some abuses may occur. A
score of 5 is considered to be the basic standard of democratic
performance.
Score of 6–7: Countries that receive a score
of 6 or 7 ensure all or nearly all adequate protections, legal
standards, or rights in the rated category. Legal protections are
strong and are enforced fairly. Citizens have access to legal
redress when their rights are violated, and the political system
functions smoothly.
- Accountability and Public Voice
- Free and fair electoral laws and elections
- Is the authority of government based upon the will of the
people as expressed by regular, free, and fair elections under fair
electoral laws, with universal and equal suffrage, open to multiple
parties, conducted by secret ballot, monitored by independent
electoral authorities, with honest tabulation of ballots, and free
of fraud and intimidation?
- Are there equal campaigning opportunities for all parties?
- Is there the opportunity for the effective rotation of power
among a range of different political parties representing competing
interests and policy options?
- Are there adequate regulations to prevent undue influence of
economically privileged interests (e.g., effective campaign finance
laws), and are they enforced?
- Effective and accountable government
- Are the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of
government able to oversee the actions of one another and hold each
other accountable for any excessive exercise of power?
- Does the state system ensure that people’s political choices
are free from domination by the specific interests of power groups
(e.g., the military, foreign powers, totalitarian parties, regional
hierarchies, and/or economic oligarchies)?
- Is the civil service selected, promoted, and dismissed on the
basis of open competition and by merit?
- Is the state engaged in issues reflecting the interests of
women; ethnic, religious, and other distinct groups; and disabled
people?
- Civic engagement and civic monitoring
- Are civic groups able to testify, comment on, and influence
pending government policy or legislation?
- Are nongovernmental organizations free from legal impediments
from the state and from onerous requirements for registration?
- Are donors and funders of civic organizations and public policy
institutes free of state pressures?
- Media independence and freedom of expression
- Does the state support constitutional or other legal
protections for freedom of expression and an environment conducive
to media freedom?
- Does the state oppose the use of onerous libel, security, or
other laws to punish through either excessive fines or imprisonment
those who scrutinize government officials and policies?
- Does the government protect journalists from extra-legal
intimidation, arbitrary arrest and detention, or physical violence
at the hands of state authorities or any other actor, including
through fair and expeditious investigation and prosecution when
cases do occur?
- Does the state refrain from direct and indirect censorship of
print or broadcast media?
- Does the state hinder access to the Internet as an information
source?
- Does the state refrain from funding the media in order to
propagandize, primarily provide official points of view, and/or
limit access by opposition parties and civic critics?
- Does the government otherwise refrain from attempting to
influence media content (e.g., through direct ownership of
distribution networks or printing facilities; prohibitive tariffs;
onerous registration requirements; selective distribution of
advertising; or bribery)?
- Civil Liberties
- Protection from state terror, unjustified imprisonment, and
torture
- Is there protection against torture by officers of the state,
including through effective punishment in cases where torture is
found to have occurred?
- Are prison conditions respectful of the human dignity of
inmates?
- Does the state effectively protect against or respond to
attacks on political opponents or other peaceful activists?
- Are there effective protections against arbitrary arrest,
including of political opponents or other peaceful activists?
- Is there effective protection against long-term detention
without trial?
- Does the state protect citizens from abuse by private/non-state
actors (including crime and terrorism)?
- Does the state take measures to prevent human trafficking?
- Do citizens have means of effective petition and redress when
their rights are violated by state authorities?
- Gender equity
- Does the state ensure that both men and women are entitled to
the full enjoyment of all civil and political rights?
- Does the state take measures, including legislation, to modify
or abolish existing laws, regulations, customs, and practices that
constitute discrimination against women?
- Does the state make reasonable efforts to protect against
gender discrimination in employment and occupation?
- Rights of ethnic, religious, and other distinct groups
- Does the state ensure that persons belonging to ethnic,
religious, and other distinct groups exercise fully and effectively
all their human rights and fundamental freedoms (including ethnic,
cultural, and linguistic rights) without discrimination and with
full equality before the law?
- Does the state take measures, including legislation, to modify
or abolish existing laws, regulations, customs, and practices that
constitute discrimination against ethnic, religious, and other
distinct groups?
- Does the state make a progressive effort to modify or abolish
existing laws, regulations, customs, and practices that constitute
discrimination against disabled people?
- Does the state make reasonable efforts to protect against
discrimination against ethnic, religious, and other distinct groups
in employment and occupation?
- Freedom of conscience and belief
- Does the state accept the right of its citizens to hold
religious beliefs of their choice and practice their religion as
they deem appropriate, within reasonable constraints?
- Does the state refrain from involvement in the appointment of
religious or spiritual leaders and in the internal organizational
activities of faith-related organizations?
- Does the state refrain from placing restrictions on religious
observance, religious ceremony, and religious education?
- Freedom of association and assembly
- Does the state recognize every person’s right to freedom of
association and assembly?
- Does the state respect the right to form, join, and participate
in free and independent trade unions?
- Does the state effectively protect and recognize the rights of
civic associations, business organizations, and political
organizations to organize, mobilize, and advocate for peaceful
purposes?
- Does the state permit demonstrations and public protests and
refrain from using excessive force against them?
- Rule of Law
- Independent judiciary
- Is there independence, impartiality, and nondiscrimination in
the administration of justice, including from economic, political
or religious influences?
- Are judges and magistrates protected from interference by the
executive and/or legislative branches?
- Do legislative, executive, and other governmental authorities
comply with judicial decisions, which are not subject to change
except through established procedures for judicial review?
- Are judges appointed, promoted, and dismissed in a fair and
unbiased manner?
- Are judges appropriately trained in order to carry out justice
in a fair and unbiased manner?
- Primacy of rule of law in civil and criminal matters
- According to the legal system, is everyone charged with a
criminal offence presumed innocent until proven guilty?
- Are citizens given a fair, public, and timely hearing by a
competent, independent, and impartial tribunal?
- Do citizens have the right and access to independent
counsel?
- Are prosecutors independent of political direction and
control?
- Are public officials and ruling party actors prosecuted for the
abuse of power and other wrongdoing?
- Accountability of security forces and military to civilian
authorities
- Is there effective and democratic civilian state control of the
police, military, and internal security forces through the
judicial, legislative, and executive branches?
- Do police, military, and internal security services refrain
from interference and/or involvement in the political process?
- Are the police, military, and internal security services held
accountable for any abuses of power for personal gain?
- Do members of the police, military and internal security
services respect human rights?
- Protection of property rights
- Does the state give everyone the right to own property alone as
well as in association with others?
- Does the state adequately enforce property rights and
contracts, including through adequate provisions for indigenous
populations?
- Does the state protect citizens from the arbitrary and/or
unjust deprivation of their property (e.g., Does the state unjustly
revoke property titles for governmental use or to pursue a
political agenda)?
- Anticorruption and Transparency
- Environment to protect against corruption
- Is the government free from excessive bureaucratic regulations,
registration requirements, and/or other controls that increase
opportunities for corruption?
- Is state activity in the economy (including public enterprises
and privatizations) regulated in a manner that minimizes
opportunities for
corruption?
- Does the state enforce the separation of public office from the
personal interests of public officeholders?
- Are there adequate financial disclosure procedures that prevent
conflicts of interest among public officials (e.g., Are the assets
declarations of public officials open to public and media scrutiny
and verification)?
- Procedures and systems to enforce anticorruption laws
- Does the state enforce an effective legislative or
administrative process designed to promote integrity and to
prevent, detect, and punish the corruption of public
officials?
- Are there effective and independent investigative and auditing
bodies created by the government (e.g., an auditor general or
comptroller) and do they function without impediment or political
pressure?
- Does the state provide victims of corruption with adequate
mechanisms to pursue their rights?
- Does the tax administrator implement effective internal audit
systems to ensure the accountability of tax, royalty, and tariff
collection?
- Existence of anticorruption norms, standards, and
protections
- Are allegations of corruption by government officials at the
national and local levels thoroughly investigated and prosecuted
without prejudice?
- Are allegations of corruption given wide and unbiased airing in
the news media?
- Do whistleblowers, anticorruption activists, investigators have
a legal environment that protects them, so they feel secure about
reporting cases of bribery and corruption?
- Does the state protect education from pervasive corruption and
graft (e.g., Are bribes necessary to gain admission or good
grades)?
- Governmental transparency
- Is there significant legal, regulatory, and judicial
transparency as manifested through public access to government
information?
- Do citizens have a legal right to obtain information about
government operations, and means to petition government agencies
for it?
- Is the executive budget-making process comprehensive and
transparent and subject to meaningful legislative review and
scrutiny?
- Does the government publish detailed and accurate accounting of
expenditures in a timely fashion?
- Does the state ensure transparency, open-bidding, and effective
competition in the awarding of government contracts?
- Does the government enable the fair and legal administration
and distribution of foreign assistance?