Since the demand for democracy emerged during the Arab Spring across many middle eastern countries, the origin country Tunisia have been countlessly facing many challenges in their struggle against authoritarian resurgence. What factors have contributed to Tunisia’s difficulties in sustaining its democratic progress, and in what ways can democratic theory help elucidate these political principles so that we might be able to pinpoint the root cause of these events? This question will help us understand not only fracture of the system, but also the pushback by many parties of interest on all sides. On December 17th, 2010, a man by the name of Mohamed Bouazizi set himself on fire in front of the municipal office to symbolize the corruption of the Tunisian Government sparking what is now known as the Jasmine Revolution. This Revolution was a call for fundamental change, amplifying protestors to take to the streets and address many disparities within the socio-economic spectrum. The movement was successful in removing Zine El Abidine Ben Ali who was the presidential dictator after his attempt of amelioration. The consensus of this trajectory may be described by Schmitter and Karl (1991). They suggest that democratization signifies the final stage of an extensive social development process, where social structures evolve to become increasingly specialized and distinct from political authority. Thus democracy is regarded as the ultimate phase. The call for democratization witnessed during the Jasmine Revolution, along with other similar movements, illustrates this theory’s assertion that democracy will ultimately triumph, indicating that the current situation in Tunisia is bound to reach this conclusion. However, this does not resolve the initial inquiry posed by Schmitter and Karl (1991). To further analyze this, we can refer to the research conducted by Waldner and Lust (2018) on democratization theory, which will provide us with essential concepts of democracy and highlight the regression of Tunisia’s sovereignty.   

Precision of Lawful Backsliding & Deception 

     As we present the foundation for Waldner and Lust (2018), it is best to understand the meaning of democratic backsliding in which according to them, backsliding refers to a situation in which a nation experiences a decline in democratic practices, regardless of its current status as a democracy or otherwise. In the context of Tunisia in 2014, the newly adopted constitution implemented checks and balances for newly elected presidents through the acquisition of popular votes. On the 23rd of October, president Kais Saïed took office as his election campaign secured 73% of the votes with the promises of gradual democratic changes as he was one of the framers who helped create the 2014 Tunisian constitution after the revolution of 2010. On July 25, 2021, Saïed declared a state of emergency, suspended parliament and key institutions, and gradually took full control of the government and judiciary. In 2022, Saïed implemented a new constitution that granted him significant presidential authority without substantial constraints, while also altering the electoral process to enhance his dominance. Political scientists Waldner and Lust (2018) describe this phenomenon in two out of the six theories of backsliding as their applicability strengthens in order for the original question to be answered. The name of these theoretical concepts are ‘Agent-Based Theory’ and ‘Political Institutions’. The theory behind political agency is best described as democratic transitions depending on the choices of political leaders and groups, whose decisions can lead to different outcomes. The reference made to O’Donnell and Schmitter (1986)  puts in perspective that a political leader strategically interacts with those within the system to slowly dismantle it for the sake of self interest. As further explained through the dismantling of parliament in March 30th, 2022 even resulting in the imprisonment of  opposition of political disinterest. Waldner and Lust (2018) describes political institutions in two concepts, vertical accountability and horizontal. Vertical accountability influence citizens perceptions of government responsiveness, thereby reducing support for anti-democratic movements. Whereas they impact horizontal accountability in constraining the power of leaders and enhancing governmental effectiveness by aiding in the prevention of crises that might warrant undemocratic measures. Due to this fact, vertical accountability within Tunisia is met with harsh prison sentences, limiting the right of citizens to challenge Saïed’s authoritative behaviors. According to the Human Rights Watch (HRW), On April 19, 2025, a Tunisian court sentenced thirty-seven individuals to prison sentences ranging from four to sixty-six years in the politically sensitive “Conspiracy Case,” where they were accused of conspiring against President Saïed. The trial was conducted over just three sessions, affording the defendants minimal opportunity to mount a defense. This effectively illustrates the connection between the absence of vertical accountability and the utilization of horizontal oppression as discussed in Waldner and Lust’s (2018) political theory. By acknowledging the underlying reasons for Tunisia’s systemic democratic backsliding, we are also moving closer to exploring a solution to the initial question asked at the very beginning.   

The Imbalance of Power: Can we appropriately classify Tunisia as a Delegative Democracy? 

     With the lack of consolidation under President Saïeds, one can’t help but wonder what to call Tunisia as they still practice democratic means like holding elections, yet there is little to know policy change coming from outside interest groups. For this, the political scientist of interest is now Guillermo O’Donnell (1994) as his framework on what he calls ‘Delegative Democracies’. According to him, delegative democracies are systems in which, despite the election of leaders, they wield authority with limited oversight from other institutions. In such regimes, the president frequently governs as though they possess a personal mandate, disregarding legislatures, courts, and other entities, while the populace primarily holds them accountable solely during electoral processes. When applied to Tunisia, it is appropriate to associate such terms and conditions in relations to waldner and lust (2018) framework. But for further solidification as to why this is a delegative democracy Guillermo O’Donnell (1994), according to freedomhouse.org, on July 2021, President Saïed’s consolidation of power resulted in a further decline in the transparency of governmental decisions and law enforcement activities. The 2016 freedom of information legislation faced criticism for permitting an excessive number of security-related exemptions.

Any Hope In Restorative Democracy? 

     With all this being said, we shall now see if we can make an attempt at answer the question first proposed being: What factors have contributed to Tunisia’s difficulties in sustaining its democratic progress, and in what ways can democratic theory help elucidate these political principles so that we might be able to pinpoint the root cause of these events? To answer of this question will not suffice ultimately but push the perception of Tunisia’s democratic backsliding in the right direction in order to find possibilities for solutions and propose restorative solutions for the Tunisian people. With the help of Waldner and Lust (2018), O’Donnell (1994), O’Donnell and Schmitter (1986), and even Schmitter and Karl (1991), we can now understand that Tunisia is a delegative democracy with the lack of vertical accountability. This heavily impacts horizontal accountability as President Saïed has centralized control with little to no checks and balances that was once the beacon of progression. Przeworski and Limongi (1997) has showed as that citizens do innately strive for democracy as we’ve seen it with the Jasmine Revolution in 2010 but isn’t as much reliable for the inevitability of democracy being the final stage. A new question posed here may potentially be what kind of democracy would as it is a very faceted ideology. Ideally it would be one greater than the authoritarian regime change of Tunisia where democratic crackdowns aren’t as common and the civil liberties is restored as it once was in 2014.