Democracy Today.indb - Universidade do Minho

political decisions, a series of measures was taken: The underlying
political units were mixed, in that each of them consisted of three
geographically different parts: a city, coastal and inland region. The
chair of the coordinating council with its 500 members rotated among
these units throughout the year and rotation was also a key element
of the offices. Moreover, office holders were mostly assigned by drawing
lots, while this was true for all the 201 or more judges who populated
the courts. Unlike today, where elections are usually viewed as
the key democratic mechanism, back then, it was drawing lots. [6] In
order to enable every citizen to participate, allowances were granted
for attendance of the plenary assembly and the courts. This measure
underlines the immense value that the Athenians attached to political
life and that is expressed by Pericles who states that a person staying
away from it is regarded as useless (Thuc. II, 40). Similarly, Aristotle
defines the citizen as sharing in the administration of justice and in
offices (Pol., 1275a).
The importance of participation is reflected by the competence of
the two institutions: They could literally decide everything. Limitations
in this respect would have been considered as a negation of the freedom
that the Athenians as an independent polis enjoyed. Furthermore,
the budget constraints that shape large parts of today’s politics did
not exist to the same extent, as funds were raised when needed and
wealthier citizens expected to contribute. [7] Still, decision-making was
not completely unrestricted, since every resolution had to comply with
the existing laws. The laws in turn were not seen as the central issue
115
DESIGNING THE PUBLIC
REALM – A PREREQUISITE
FOR DEMOCRATIC
INNOVATION
Marco Walter
up to 15’000 people to meet. Occasionally, meetings were held in the theatre of Dyonisus
or – if marine issues were to be decided – in the theatres of Piraeus. Most of the courts
of jurisdiction were situated next to the agora (Bleicken 1995: 192 and 247).
6
This is implied by Aristotle’s statement that the people were the master of the state
(politeia) because they were the masters of the ps phos (the pebbles with which the judges
voted on the trials) (Ath. Pol. 9) and likewise Ober (2008: 8) maintains that the institutions
of democracy were never centred on elections. However, while drawing lots was
the crucial mechanism, it was not exclusively applied but often combined with elections,
as Buchstein (2009: 91-99) has pointed out.
7
Bleicken (1995: 291-299) gives an overview of the financial sources of the Athenian polis
and Finley (1977: 176ff.) points out the peculiar characteristic of leitourgia, oscillating
between its compulsory and honorific meaning to wealthier citizens. The overall attitude
of the Greeks towards fund raising is concisely summarized in Demosthenes’ speech on
the Navy (14, 26): “The money, I say, we have when it is really needed, but not before”.