Although democratisation can be a vital component of peace settlements, formulaic applications of supposed international norms of democratic governance are potentially counterproductive. Each conflict situation is different; many situations do not admit of prefabricated solutions that one can justly expect all reasonable contestants to accept, either at the outset or as events develop. Procedural standards associated with the ‘democratic entitlement’ obscure the underlying purposes that democratic forms, to be meaningful, need to fulfil. Post-conflict conditions, typically marked by sharp social divisions and a lack of agreement on the political community’s basic premises, are precisely the conditions in which it cannot be taken for granted that standard procedural norms will work to produce democratic social realities. Improvisation is thus essential. Peace and democracy may both be better served if the international lawyers stand aside.

The conclusion summarises the Convention's commitment to a liberal, representative and substantive democracy and highlights how the Convention might be interpreted to support more deliberative, participatory and inclusive models of democracy,

This chapter examines different theories of democracy, highlighting the relevance of liberal, representative and substantive democracy for the European Convention on Human Rights. It outlines deliberative, participatory and inclusive models of democracy that address limitations of liberal representative democracy.