leadership crises and decline of opposition parties in

theoretical model. They disregard socio-political dynamics and societal constraints and
variables in their preconceptions and apologia and merely justify assaults on democracy
is not an absolute value or, at best, does not need to be same thing to all peoples and take
the same form in all places.
Based on Diamond’s summation, when reduced to fundamentals, we could deduce
that democracy, in operational terms, could be regarded as meaningful representative
democracy. This means participation in decision making and the overall organization of
the society in a representational way with the use of the constitution as the supreme and
fundamental law. With the growing complexity of modern societies, it has expended as a
philosophy to entail insistence on the right and capacity of a people (acting either directly
or through their representatives) to control their institutions for their own objectives. It
places a high value on the equality of individuals and frees people from any restraints not
self-imposed or imposed by the consent of the majority. In a democracy, both the ruled
and the rulers are regulated through constitutional provisions.
From the foregoing, we come to the conclusion that while there are contending
views which sometimes appear to be in conflict with, rather than corroborate each other,
there are some elements which are, to varying degrees, common to all conceptions of
democracy. The deductions that could be made from all conceptions of democracy as a
way of life are that, it has certain characteristics which include the right or opportunity to
choose within a given political context. It also implies some opportunity and the exercise
of free will. It provides an environment for popular participation in the political process
and promotes active involvement of the greater percentage of the people in the
determination of how they would be governed, who would govern them and the nature
xxxii