The All-Affected Principle

Even if one agrees that political institutions should be democratic, the question remains as to who should be included in the group of people that decides democratically. Two principles are discussed in the literature to address this question: the “all-subjected principle,” according to which all those who are subjected to rules or coercion should have the opportunity to participate in decision-making, and the “all-affected principle,” according to which all those who are affected by the decisions should have the opportunity to participate. The chapter rejects the all-subjected principle on the ground that there are global governance institutions that do not make rules or exercise coercion. Since the question of who should be included in decision-making is also relevant to these institutions, the all-subjected principle cannot serve as general principle with regard to the boundary problem. Instead, the chapter defends a version of the all-affected principle. Against the common objection that this principle would unduly expand the group of people entitled to democratic participation, it argues that, first, prior decisions can limit the number of options from which an institution can choose and thereby also reduce the number of people affected by any of these options. Secondly, it is reasonable to differentiate entitlements to participation according to the way in which different groups of people are affected.