The shooting of former US president Donald Trump was the second assassination attempt on a populist political leader this year. Just two months ago, Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico was seriously injured after being shot four times at close range, highlighting the danger posed by the resurgence of political violence around the world.
While the attempted assassinations of Trump and Fico have caused many liberals to tone down their rhetoric, such reactions miss the point. The driving force behind the rise of political violence is not criticism of authoritarians, but rather the failure of ostensibly functioning democracies to address accusations of criminality against populist leaders in a timely manner.
Like Trump, Fico was attacked in the midst of an unlikely political comeback, five years after he was forced to step down when his inner circle was implicated in the gruesome murder of investigative journalist Jan Kuciak and his girlfriend.
Regrettably, Slovakia’s pro-democracy parties failed to ensure that Fico was held accountable for his actions. In a remarkable 2022 showdown, Slovakia’s parliament voted against lifting Fico’s immunity from prosecution, preventing the authorities from arresting him on organized-crime charges. A year later, Fico returned to power and resumed his authoritarian agenda.
However, while Slovakia’s liberals have been outraged by the failure to strip Fico of immunity, in the US, the Democratic Party seems to be in denial. Many US liberals attribute the slow pace of the criminal cases against Trump to the inherent sluggishness of the justice system, overlooking the errors that have led to these delays.
Chief among these errors is US President Joe Biden’s appointment of Merrick Garland as attorney general. As early as 2022, Biden was reportedly frustrated with Garland’s reluctance to prosecute Trump for his numerous crimes, privately complaining that Garland was acting more like “a ponderous judge” than an aggressive prosecutor addressing a major threat to the US’ democracy.
However, Biden, adhering to longstanding norms, apparently did not share these concerns with Garland.
The resurgence of political violence should make us rethink these norms. While we might never fully understand the motivations of individual assassins, the spectacle of a major political figure being constantly accused of serious crimes yet evading justice for years creates inevitable social tensions. This is why prosecutors do not publicly label individuals as murderers or rapists without prosecuting them: Failing to act not only allows potentially dangerous criminals to roam free, but also risks stoking public fear and discontent.
In the wake of the attempt on Trump’s life, Fox News and other conservative media outlets repeatedly highlighted Biden’s comments about Trump being “an existential threat to our democracy” as an example of incendiary political rhetoric. The criticism is partly valid: accusations of fostering insurrection or engaging in other criminal activity should be proven in court, not used as fodder for election campaigns. Conversely, if these allegations are unfounded, it is indeed incendiary for Democrats to repeat them.
Other established democracies have demonstrated that former leaders can be held accountable for crimes they committed. Two former French presidents, Jacques Chirac and Nicolas Sarkozy, were charged and convicted of corruption. In Brazil, former president Jair Bolsonaro was barred from running for office just a few months after his supporters stormed the Supreme Court and National Congress in an attempt to oust his successor, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. One year later, Bolsonaro has already been indicted for money laundering and faces multiple criminal investigations.
Poland provides a particularly useful model for countries grappling with an authoritarian past. Since assuming office in December last year, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has taken a bold approach to safeguarding democracy, delivering on his promise to sweep away the corruption of the previous government with an “iron broom.”
For starters, Tusk appointed former ombudsman Adam Bodnar as the country’s chief prosecutor. Unlike Garland, Bodnar did not let misplaced concerns about the optics of prosecuting political opponents deter him from swiftly upholding the rule of law. Bodnar’s office did not wait for parliamentary inquiries to conclude before charging key members of the Law and Justice party with abuse of power, misappropriation of public funds and other felonies.
While Tusk refrains from interfering with Bodnar’s work or the independent courts, which would eventually determine the fate of the accused, he does not shy away from publicly explaining and defending his government’s aggressive prosecutorial efforts.
In numerous speeches and social media posts, Tusk has emphasized that the iron broom is not an end in itself, but rather a necessary step toward national reconciliation.
“That is what reckoning looks like. Zero politics, only substance. And after the reckoning and restitution time will come for reconciliation. Just as I promised,” he posted on X on July 3.
So far, Tusk’s bold approach has put populists on the defensive. Americans should take notice.
As extreme polarization and political violence threaten to undermine the US’ democracy, it is abundantly clear that authoritarian populists must be held accountable in a court of law, not just in the court of public opinion.
Maciej Kisilowski is associate professor of law and strategy at Central European University in Vienna.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
US political scientist Francis Fukuyama, during an interview with the UK’s Times Radio, reacted to US President Donald Trump’s overturning of decades of US foreign policy by saying that “the chance for serious instability is very great.” That is something of an understatement. Fukuyama said that Trump’s apparent moves to expand US territory and that he “seems to be actively siding with” authoritarian states is concerning, not just for Europe, but also for Taiwan. He said that “if I were China I would see this as a golden opportunity” to annex Taiwan, and that every European country needs to think
For years, the use of insecure smart home appliances and other Internet-connected devices has resulted in personal data leaks. Many smart devices require users’ location, contact details or access to cameras and microphones to set up, which expose people’s personal information, but are unnecessary to use the product. As a result, data breaches and security incidents continue to emerge worldwide through smartphone apps, smart speakers, TVs, air fryers and robot vacuums. Last week, another major data breach was added to the list: Mars Hydro, a Chinese company that makes Internet of Things (IoT) devices such as LED grow lights and the
US President Donald Trump is an extremely stable genius. Within his first month of presidency, he proposed to annex Canada and take military action to control the Panama Canal, renamed the Gulf of Mexico, called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy a dictator and blamed him for the Russian invasion. He has managed to offend many leaders on the planet Earth at warp speed. Demanding that Europe step up its own defense, the Trump administration has threatened to pull US troops from the continent. Accusing Taiwan of stealing the US’ semiconductor business, it intends to impose heavy tariffs on integrated circuit chips
RSS