Armenia leads in regional democracy rankings despite decline
Armenia’s democracy index
In 2024, Armenia’s Democracy Index stood at 5.35, nearly 5% lower than in 2022. These figures come from the Democracy Index report, published by the prestigious British research center Economist Intelligence Unit.
The index is based on 60 indicators grouped into five categories:
- Electoral process and pluralism
- Political culture
- Public political participation
- Government functioning
- Civil liberties
Each category is scored on a scale from 0 to 10, with the country’s overall Democracy Index being the average of these scores. Based on this index, countries are classified into four regime types: authoritarian, hybrid, flawed democracy, and full democracy.
According to the report, Armenia has retained its status as a hybrid regime. Despite a slight decline in its ranking, it remains the regional leader in democratic development. Among 160 countries, Armenia ranks 82nd, followed by Georgia at 94th and Azerbaijan at 126th.
- Armenia to begin EU accession process as parliament backs civil society initiative
- Opinion: ‘Armenia and US sign strategic partnership charter as legacy for Trump’
- ‘We will strive to balance our relations with EU and Russia’ – Pashinyan
Decline driven by corruption indicators
Joan Hoey, head of the expert group responsible for compiling the Democracy Index, initially highlighted Armenia’s achievements when commenting on the country’s situation. She recalled that after the 2018 Velvet Revolution, Armenia experienced a “sharp surge” in democratization. In 2019, its index reached 5.54. However, in 2020, the score declined due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the war launched by Azerbaijan in Nagorno-Karabakh:
“In 2021, we saw some recovery, but since then, Armenia’s domestic politics and regional relations have experienced setbacks. This led to a prolonged period of political instability, mass protests, and other challenges. However, the index rose to 5.63.”
Hoey noted that Armenia’s Democracy Index dropped significantly in 2023:
“The index fell to 5.42 by the end of 2023 after that year’s dramatic events [referring to the exodus of all Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh and their resettlement in Armenia], which led to a collapse in public trust toward the government and political parties.”
Regarding the further decline in 2024, Hoey believes that corruption indicators played a key role. She noted that many reforms in Armenia have stalled, and power is now concentrated in the hands of the prime minister and his inner circle:
“Parliament has taken a back seat. It should function as an independent body, but in Armenia, it no longer operates as one.”
“Armenia has political will to eradicate corruption”
Armenian authorities have repeatedly stated that systemic corruption does not exist in the country.
“There is episodic corruption. Corruption as a phenomenon has always existed, alongside the emergence and development of society. It exists in all countries—the difference lies in its scale, depending on the country and its level of development. This harmful phenomenon will continue to exist in the future. The state’s task is to minimize it,” Justice Minister Srbui Galyan said earlier this year.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, speaking at the Anti-Corruption Committee late last year, emphasized:
“There is a clear, unambiguous, and undeniable political will to eradicate corruption in Armenia. But it is evident that this is not happening. I do not believe the time has come to declare that this problem has been solved.”
The prime minister also assured that all necessary conditions have been created to establish an independent judiciaryin Armenia. However, he acknowledged a “sense of stagnation” in both the justice system and anti-corruption efforts. Ultimately, Pashinyan concluded that the government must identify the root of the problem.
Expert commentary
Political analyst Narek Sukiassian believes that Armenia’s anti-corruption efforts have not yielded the results desired by either the government or society.
He does not rule out that, in addition to corruption indicators, other domestic political factors have contributed to the decline in Armenia’s Democracy Index. In particular, he points to the lack of judicial independence:
“We can talk about the executive branch’s involvement in the judiciary, especially in terms of appointments, which has raised questions about judicial independence.”
Sukiassian also highlights the factor of public trust, noting that opinion polls indicate a low level of trust in institutions:
“For example, we see very low voter turnout in elections. And that is quite telling.”
The political analyst also pointed out that in 2024, democracy declined in 83 countries, while progress was recorded in only 37. The remaining 47 countries saw no change.
Moreover, the largest decline in democracy, both in Armenia and globally, has been observed in the category of “government functioning”.
“This category evaluates the system of checks and balances between branches of power, the extent to which government decisions are made by elected representatives, the government’s independence from undue internal and external influence, its accountability and transparency, the supremacy of the legislative body, public trust in the government and political parties, corruption, the competence and willingness of public officials to implement state policy, as well as citizens’ perception of their freedom of choice and control over their own lives,” Sukiassian explained.
