In several corners of the world lately, the health of democracy within nations is being severely eroded, and the oxygen of civil liberty is thinning as a result of the “illegal logging” of rule-of-law principles throughout various aspects of statecraft. The CIVICIUS Monitor 2025 recorded 3,120 violations of civic space globally between November 2024 and October 2025, ranging from the detention of demonstrators occurring in at least 82 countries, the disproportionate use of force by authorities in 67 countries, to the detention of journalists covering public criticism in 73 countries.
In Ecuador, the invocation of emergency state mechanisms enabled military intervention in civic spaces during demonstrations against the government’s decision to abolish fuel subsidies, which produced significant increases in fuel prices under the justification of combating drug cartels. These interventions resulted in at least three fatalities, including the indigenous Kichwa leader EfraÃn Fuerez, and the detention of 205 individuals during protests in September and October 2025. In Georgia, Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International reported in December 2025 that thousands were sentenced for ‘petty hooliganism’ and resisting police following protests against the suspension of European Union integration. The Georgian government also raised fines tenfold for protest-related violations, such as obstructing access to government buildings. In Indonesia, 6,719 individuals were arrested during demonstrations and civil actions throughout 2025, according to a comprehensive report from Konde.co, which cited data from Amnesty International Indonesia, YLBHI, and AMAN.
These data are especially troubling given the simultaneous advancement of AI technology and worldwide efforts to deal with environmental challenges. The prevalence of civic space violations, including mass arrests in Indonesia and the criminalization of protests in Georgia, suggests that many modern states increasingly perceive dissent as a threat rather than a essential part of democracy. This trend represents a form of legal decline, in which legal instruments, such as emergency declarations in Ecuador or heightened fines in Georgia, are used to suppress public discourse. From a comparative law perspective, this shift constitutes a dangerous movement from the rule of law, characterized by legal supremacy, to rule by law, where legal mechanisms are used as tools of power to undermine the fundamental right to dissent.
To address this cycle of repression, it is necessary to reconceptualize the ‘People’s Dissenting Opinion’ as more than community-based activism and instead recognize it as a formal legal source with corrective authority. Similar to how a judge’s dissenting opinion is appreciated for its intellectual integrity, mass public protests should be regarded as a ‘constitutional notice of objection’ that the state is required to address through dialogue as opposed than repression. Accordingly, a viable legal reform would involve strengthening mechanisms for Legislative Recall grounded based on meaningful public participation. Under this model, any policy that provokes widespread public opposition would automatically undergo a transparent parliamentary review, thereby cutting the likelihood of violent escalation.
Furthermore, technology and AI should be employed not as instruments of surveillance, but as components of digital democracy infrastructure designed to verify and incorporate public input in real time. The challenges observed in Georgia and Ecuador could be alleviated if legal early warning systems were in place to identify misalignments between government regulations and social needs before conflicts escalate. By conceptualizing the people’s dissenting opinion as part of the nation’s immune system, democracy can be preserved and judicial development can continue aligned with technological development.
At a global level, we require a new paradigm that moves beyond only reports of conventional human rights violations: the establishment of “Universal Civic Credit” (UCC) as a standard for a nation’s eligibility in international affairs. Conceptually, UCC positions “Civic Oxygen”, the space for differing opinions, as a liquid national asset equivalent to foreign exchange reserves or fiscal credit ratings. The logic is simple yet radical: if a country like Ecuador or Georgia utilizes emergency mechanisms to silence its people, their UCC score will automatically plummet. This decline would not only impact political reputation yet would be systemically linked to international economic cooperation protocols, access to global AI technology, and even climate aid requirements. In this way, protecting dissenting opinions is no no longer only a moral choice for a regime, but a pragmatic necessity to maintain the nation’s economic and technological existence on the world stage.
This novel idea offers a solution to the current stagnation of international law by creating a “Decentralized Civic Ledger”. Utilizing transparent and tamper-proof blockchain technology, every arrest of a demonstrator or criminalization of a journalist anywhere in the world would be permanently recorded as a “democratic debt”. This concept transforms public reason from a mere voice easily silenced into valuable, sovereign data. Repression in various countries would no longer be viewed solely as a “domestic matter,” but as a degradation of the global civilization’s ecosystem. By implementing a sovereignty audit based on the availability of space for critique, we compel nations to realize that the only way to remain a “developed nation” in the future is not by extinguishing the people’s reason, but through facilitating every dissent as the energy for sustainable legal renewal.
The global democratic crisis observed in 2025, including military repression in Ecuador, financial penalties in Georgia, and mass arrests in Indonesia, illustrates a condition of ‘constitutional hypoxia,’ where civil liberties are diminished by legal authoritarianism. This situation requires a shift from punitive legal structures to participatory and circular models, in which the ‘People’s Dissenting Opinion’ is recognized as a formal legal source with corrective authority over public policy. In the context of rapid AI advancement, national legitimacy should be assessed not by artificial stability, but through the implementation of ‘Universal Civic Credit’ and a blockchain-based ‘Decentralized Civic Ledger’ that records public aspirations as permanent assets of sovereignty. By embedding the right to dissent within global economic and technological evaluation systems, states are compelled to protect public reason as an important investment in preventing societal regression. Ultimately, national health is best preserved when criticism serves as an essential component of the social immune system, ensuring that technological progress remains consistent with moral principles.
