Aretecracy

Aretecracy (from ἀρετή aretḗ, "virtue/excellence", and κράτος krátos, "rule/power"; Spanish: Aretecracia) is a democratic proposal developed by legal scholar Milton Arrieta-López. The idea combines a civic–ethical qualification process with ordinary universal elections. In this model, people who want to run for office must first obtain a qualification based on knowledge of constitutional and legal principles, public ethics, and human rights, together with a review of their civic conduct. After that, elections proceed normally.

Published descriptions present this as a way to introduce a more structured entry path into political life. The intended purpose is to professionalize candidacy and public service through a defined qualification process and procedural controls. Some versions allow qualification to be carried out not only by a national institution but also, under common standards and external auditing, by accredited non-partisan bodies such as universities.

Concept and origins

Arrieta-López introduced the proposal in a series of academic publications, beginning with La Aretedemocracia o Virtudemocracia (2018), followed by De la Democracia a la Aretecracia (2019), and later the English-language manuscript Beyond Populism and Plutocracy: Aretecracy as a New Democratic Paradigm (2024).

Across these works, he employed different labels such as Aretedemocracy/Virtuedemocracy and later Aretecracy/Aretecracia (occasionally Aretocracy/Aretocracia) to refer to a model that introduces a formal qualification stage prior to candidacy for public office. The proposed qualification is described as involving assessments related to constitutional principles, public ethics, and civic conduct. While the framework is presented as potentially applicable to multiple branches of government, the author’s discussion focuses primarily on executive office. In his writings, this qualification stage is framed as a procedural mechanism intended to regulate access to political leadership within existing electoral systems, which the author presents as a response to concerns about democratic degradation, including forms commonly described as plutocracy or ochlocracy.

Scholarly reception and usage

Peer-reviewed discussion includes Iriarte-Angarita (2020), who examines the proposal within the broader tradition of virtue-centered democratic thought and situates it in contrast with technocratic and meritocratic models.

The term also appears in independent academic works that cite or discuss Arrieta-López in substantive analyses of citizenship, political practices, democratic culture, education, public administration, and legal theory, including Hernández de Velazco et al. (2020), Troncozo Montes (2021), Fontana Filho (2022), Castillo Povea et al. (2022), Moreno, Megías and Fernández del Río (2023), Zambrano Sánchez (2023), Vilca Vilca, Isia Larico and Carcausto Sacaca (2023), Guerra Pérez (2024), Arynova et al. (2025), and De León Vertel (2025).

Applications and mentions

In 2020, an NGO with consultative status presented "Aretecracy" to the UN ECOSOC High-Level Segment in the context of discussions on the Sustainable Development Goals. In 2021, the Constitution and Regulations Committee of the Congress of Peru mentioned the proposal while examining bills to amend the Organic Law of the Executive relating to ethical and managerial requirements for ministers of state. In 2023, the concept was also referenced in an institutional publication of the Colombian Senate, produced by its legislative research body, in the context of analyses on democracy and education in Latin America, where it was used as a normative and juridico-political framework to discuss the risks of democratic degradation into plutocracy or ochlocracy.

Institutional design

Arrieta-López describes the qualification procedure as involving assessments on constitutional matters and public ethics, as well as a review of civic conduct. Some publications refer to possible oversight bodies that would apply written criteria and issue or suspend qualifications. The exact institutional form varies across his works, and later texts describe options for decentralizing some tasks to accredited institutions, provided there is a common national framework and external auditing.

Criticism and debates

Commentary on the general idea of pre-election qualification notes potential concerns, such as the risk of political influence over qualifying bodies or tensions with open electoral access. Supporters of aretecracy refer to transparency requirements, written procedures and external review as measures intended to limit these risks.

Comparison with other governance models

Model	Access to leadership	Electoral process	Common criticism
Liberal democracy	Open to all	Yes	Vulnerable to influence by money or demagogy
Technocracy	Experts only	No	Limited democratic participation
Meritocracy	Advancement by technical credentials	Varies	Overemphasis on academic or technical measures
Aretecracy	Open with civic–ethical qualification	Yes