Freedom House (FH) is a non-profit organization that was founded in 1941, with Wendell Willkie and Eleanor Roosevelt serving as its first honorary chairpersons. Best known for political advocacy surrounding issues of democracy, political freedom, and human rights, the organization's annual Freedom in the World report assesses the political rights and civil liberties of countries and territories around the world.
The report uses a two-tiered system of freedom scores and status. For scores, a country or territory is awarded 0 to 4 points for each of 10 political rights indicators and 15 civil liberties indicators; a score of 0 represents the smallest degree of freedom and 4 the greatest degree of freedom. Here are the questions FH uses in the scoring process for political rights and civil liberties:
Political Rights
Was the current head of government or other chief national authority elected through free and fair elections?
Were the current national legislative representatives elected through free and fair elections?
Are the electoral laws and framework fair, and are they implemented impartially by the relevant election management bodies?
Do the people have the right to organize in different political parties or other competitive political groupings of their choice, and is the system free of undue obstacles to the rise and fall of these competing parties or groupings?
Is there a realistic opportunity for the opposition to increase its support or gain power through elections?
Are the people’s political choices free from domination by forces that are external to the political sphere, or by political forces that employ extrapolitical means?
Do various segments of the population (including ethnic, racial, religious, gender, LGBT+, and other relevant groups) have full political rights and electoral opportunities?
Do the freely elected head of government and national legislative representatives determine the policies of the government?
Are safeguards against official corruption strong and effective?
Does the government operate with openness and transparency?
Civil Liberties
Are there free and independent media?
Are individuals free to practice and express their religious faith or nonbelief in public and private?
Is there academic freedom, and is the educational system free from extensive political indoctrination?
Are individuals free to express their personal views on political or other sensitive topics without fear of surveillance or retribution?
Is there freedom of assembly?
Is there freedom for nongovernmental organizations, particularly those that are engaged in human rights– and governance-related work?
Is there freedom for trade unions and similar professional or labor organizations?
Is there an independent judiciary?
Does due process prevail in civil and criminal matters?
Is there protection from the illegitimate use of physical force and freedom from war and insurgencies?
Do laws, policies, and practices guarantee equal treatment of various segments of the population?
Do individuals enjoy freedom of movement, including the ability to change their place of residence, employment, or education?
Are individuals able to exercise the right to own property and establish private businesses without undue interference from state or nonstate actors?
Do individuals enjoy personal social freedoms, including choice of marriage partner and size of family, protection from domestic violence, and control over appearance?
Do individuals enjoy equality of opportunity and freedom from economic exploitation?
And from the 2024 FH report, here’s how Middle East countries and territories scored on political rights and civil liberties:
Not so good, with one exception.
The combined scores of political rights and civil liberties yields a country’s overall “freedom score”. The status of Free, Partly Free, or Not Free depends on the overall score for political rights (maximum 40 points) and the overall score for civil liberties (maximum 60 points), after being equally weighted. It’s thus possible for countries or territories to have the same Freedom Score but not the same status, as was the case with Turkey and Jordan in the following table:
How does this information help lay the groundwork for an Israel-Palestinian Peace Plan?
A peace plan needs clear and achievable goals. I would like to see a peace plan that seeks to do more than resolve a territorial dispute. I want one that maximizes the political rights and civil liberties of people on both sides of the conflict. For that to happen, an Israel-Palestinian peace plan should seek common ground on specific rights and liberties and include mechanisms to protect these non-negotiable freedoms, especially given the widespread lack of safeguards in the region.