In February 1999, 400 democratic activists from over 80 countries gathered in New Delhi, India, to launch the World Movement for Democracy. For months, democracy advocates from academia, civil society, and political circles, had been discussing the need for a network that could foster connections between different pro-democracy advocates. On the eve of a new millennium, it was time to take their efforts global.

The meeting in New Delhi was convened by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and two Indian organizations, the Confederation of Indian Industry and the Centre for Policy Research. In the meeting’s keynote address, Indian economist and philosopher Amartya Sen spoke about the universality of democracy: “The value of democracy includes its intrinsic importance in human life, its instrumental role in generating political incentives, and its constructive function in the formation of values.”

25 years later, the World Movement continues to advance these fundamental principles through a global network of civil society activists, scholars, parliamentarians, thought leaders, journalists, and funders who are committed to advancing democracy. For decades, the movement has convened democracy supporters for discussions, workshops, and assemblies across the globe with the aim of facilitating knowledge sharing and building cross-regional solidarity.

But the context in which the Movement celebrates its 25th anniversary is grim—the landscape for democrats today looks far different from the global political environment that existed during the birth of the Movement. The 1990s came on the heels of a hopeful wave of democratic expansionism, in which the number of democratic governments in the world doubled between 1974 and 1990.

Today, in stark contrast, global freedom has declined for the 18th consecutive year. 71 percent of the world’s population—nearly 6 billion people—live under authoritarian rule, according to the Varieties of Democracy Institute.

Resurgent authoritarianism poses a critical threat to the work of democracy defenders around the world. But amid these new challenges to the global democratic landscape, the Movement has continued to evolve as it fosters transnational solidarity and promotes strategic innovation amongst members seeking to stem the rising tide of authoritarianism.

The Evolution of a Movement

In the World Movement’s early years, the organization aimed to build connections between regional actors. But the World Movement has continuously evolved and expanded its engagement with democracy defenders, ushering in a new generation as democratic backsliding has increased.

“The Movement has been able to adapt to the challenges,” said Gina Romero, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association. “The way those challenges are tackled now need to be different, because it is different generations, different actors,” continued Romero, who is also the former executive director of the Latin American and Caribbean Network for Democracy (REDLAD) and a former member of the steering committee of the World Movement.

Amid this generational turnover, the World Movement has expanded its engagement with a new generation of youth leading the fight for democratic governance. “[The World Movement] helps many young African activists, from Sierra Leone, Kenya, Congo, to Liberia,” said Hassan Shire, the founder and executive director of DefendDefenders in Uganda, a civil society organization that seeks to support, protect, and build the capacities of human rights defenders across the East and Horn of Africa.

Shire first became involved with the movement in 2000 and served on the World Movement’s steering committee until November 2024. Over the years, Shire has watched the World Movement empower young activists through leadership development opportunities, connections, and accelerated learning. Over time, these activists have evolved into a network of influential leaders. “You might find a number of those activists, at one point, crossing over to assume political leadership in their own countries,” said Shire.

Bridging a Gap: From Regional Networks to Transnational Connections

As threats to democracy have become more globalized, the World Movement has met this new challenge with a growing focus on building transnational solidarity among pro-democracy networks.

“Everything that we face in Ukraine, it’s just a reflection of negative global trends in the region and in the world,” said Oleksandra Matviichuk, head of the Center for Civil Liberties in Ukraine and member of the World Movement’s Steering Committee. “That’s why, if we want to be effective, we have to unite our efforts with other human rights organizations and civil society leaders from different countries.”

By convening activists and civil society groups from around the world, the World Movement has helped groups identify gaps in their work at both the country and regional levels. In fact, many regional pro-democracy networks can trace their formation directly to World Movement’s global assemblies, which take place every other year and are centered around different themes.

Ichal Supriadi is the secretary general of the Asia Democracy Network (ADN), based in Bangkok, Thailand. At the World Movement’s 2012 Global Assembly in Lima, Peru, Supriadi and other civil society actors from across Southeast Asia realized there was no coordinating mechanism for pro-democracy groups in the region. After a couple of years of planning, ADN was officially launched during the 2015 Global Assembly in Seoul and has been connecting civil society groups across the region ever since.

Before the launch of the ADN, Supriadi said that civil society groups focused largely on their specific areas of expertise, such as election transparency, anti-corruption, or minority rights. But after coming together at the Global Assembly, different groups no longer have to compete for resources because they are better connected.

“We can really see how the space provided by the World Movement has brought different people together,” Supriadi said. “They look for the big gap and then work together to create an institution like ADN in order to fill that gap. What we saw for the last 10 years, with the emerging challenges to democracy—there is no way anymore that we fight alone, we have to break the silos.”

Amplifying Innovation

“The World Movement’s global assemblies offer a snapshot of the evolving landscape of global democracy movements.” Said Tanya Hamada, former Assistant Secretary in the Department of Budget Management in the Office of the President in the Philippines. “Over a decade ago, discussions were centered around defending civil society. Then, the focus shifted to protecting civic space, and now the conversation is evolving again to promote the idea of crossovers—activists transitioning into government roles to make democracy deliver.”

“The World Movement for Democracy is one of very few, and probably the first, who took serious notice about this phenomenon of activists being pulled into positions of power,” Hamada said. “The fact that it has become a conscious effort of the World Movement to understand it enables–at least in the Philippines–civil society groups to accept it and make it part of their toolbox in terms of democracy work.”

The World Movement as a Global Solidarity Platform

Over the years, the World Movement has remained agile, evolved based on changes observed in challenges to democracy, and continued serving and inspiring its community of democracy advocates who seek to bring about democratic changes, building a freer and more just society around the world. The World Movement has given its community members a platform to share ideas and strategies, learn from each other, amplify each other’s voices, and foster collaboration. It has also recognized the courage of those at the frontlines of advocating for democracy and celebrated their resilience.

This profoundly makes the World Movement a global solidarity platform. Shire points out solitary building as one of the World Movement’s key functions. “It offers … solidarity and a platform for activists who might otherwise remain isolated in their corners of the world,” Hamada and Supriadi both see the key value of the World Movement as global solidarity, and based on their experiences in Southeast Asia, they believe that democratic progress can be made when movements are not siloed and “disparate groups [leverage] their mutual networks to push for change.”

“We have a chance to win,” said Matviichuk. Today, with the World Movement, “we have networks. We have experience. We have a lot of examples of courage in different countries. We can rely on people who support each other.” Democracy will prevail.