(TALKZIMBABWE) Botswana's form of govt: arrogantocracy, not democracy
Botswana's form of govt: arrogantocracy, not democracyMichael Dingake - Opinion
Thu, 30 Jul 2009 01:22:00 +0000
SOME familiar government concepts, before we come to the unfamiliar one of arrogantocracy: Democracy, we know, means government by the majority; demos comes from Greek and kratein from which -cracy comes, means 'rule/government.' The Greeks were the first to philosophise about forms of government and from them we have a variety of concepts:
Autocracy, means absolute power of one person, dictatorship, in other words; plutocracy, means rule by the wealthy or government representing the interests of the wealthy; aristocracy, means government of the nobility, the kings, dikgosi and all such characters; theocracy, means rule by the clergy, the imams, the diviners, a government of people who claim to rule with divine authority, like we see in Iran. So you wonder about arrogantocracy?
It is a new term, which defines a peculiar shade in a government, particularly in so-called democracies; generally the phenomenon manifests itself in parties who have been in power for a long time; invariably such become arrogant, conceited, too self-confident to imagine they can ever be disposed by earthly means.
A vivid example is Queen Marie Antoinette, French queen in the 18th century, who, some historians view as the immediate spark of the French revolution; when the hoi-poloi converged at the palace pleading for bread because they were poor and hungry, Antoinette, a symbol of extravagance and pomp of the French Court, asked the leaders who carried the petition for bread/food, obviously, full of cake in her queenly tummy, chirped, "Well, if the people don't have bread, why don't they eat cake?"
The sarcastic quip by the queen gave impetus to the mood of discontent and led to the storming of the Bastille, giving the world the ringing call of, "liberty, equality and fraternity." Even a worm will turn. The masses were so inflamed by the queen's remark that they took the law into their hands. Arrogantocracy is the quickest route to a spontaneous and popular uprising. Often, revulsion incubates and simmers, undetected before it explodes.
After so many years in power, arrogantocracy is creeping inexorably into the code of conduct of BDP rulers. The extra-judicial killings, recorded in the country in the past 15 months are testimony; the Minister of Defence, Security and Justice, in Parliament unabashedly tells the MPs they have no locus standi in their constituents' interests; however they perish, at the hands of security agents! Simply stated, there shall be no public inquiry into any sordid deaths met at the hands of the happy-go-lucky agents.
The Vice President, who in terms of the BDP-doctored constitution, might become the next President, should anything happen to the current President, also has the temerity to echo his colleague's sentiment, by saying, taking one or two lives by trigger-happy security hooligans, is no big deal; after all, the country's image is not that fragile, and the world won't stop touting Botswana as 'a shining example of democracy,' for that. No slip of the tongue.
His Excellency the President of Botswana, paved the way to the crude aloofness to the cowboy-style killing of Kalafatis by his Ministers; except taking exception to one newspaper linking him to the killing, he saw no fuss for anything. When citizens die traumatically and unnaturally in civilised countries, heads of state are the first to offer condolences to the aggrieved. In our case, the head of state behaved like Jimmy Kruger of the apartheid fascist state, who said, "It leaves me cold," when Soweto school children were massacred by police, in 1976.
Arrogantocracy is not new, under the BDP regime, which has been in the saddle for 43 years, but it has developed helicopter wings since April Fools day in 2008, under Ian Khama: Political and public service vacancies are reserved for relatives, ex-army sycophants, favourite party members, and generally for yes-men and yes-women, in full view of the public eye. 'The dogs may bark but the caravan goes on!'
Way back, Honourable Joy Phumapi, ruling party backbencher, tabled a motion for President, cabinet and MPs to declare their financial interests, assets and liabilities in a register accessible to the public, for transparency and preemption of corruption. This was and still is, a popular demand. Although the motion was unanimously supported by MPs, the opposition remained skeptical, suspicious, that the ruling party support was a PR exercise; that led to the Minister in the Office of the President, promising during the debate, that the motion would be implemented, without delay.
Almost ten years after the adoption of the motion and the Minister's fervent promise, the public learned, with shock, the motion would not graduate into legislation, instead, a code of conduct would be formulated. A code of conduct, does not normally substitute a legislative imperative; anyhow even that diversionary dummy has not seen the light of day; that is how arrogant the BDP is!
The BDP rule is a litany of incidences of arrogance, too numerous to enumerate: from scornfully ignoring the Ombudsman's ruling to the President's unexplained rejection of bench nominees by the Judicial Service Commission, hitherto trusted organ in unbiased judicial appointments. But, wait! The newest Executive arrogance is in berating government critics, as unpatriotic. Arrogance par excellence! We are being asked, nay, ordered, to sweep the muck dripping from all governance pores, under the carpet? No-ways. Government critics, particularly the independent media, must refuse to be muzzled.
We are a global village whose solidarity, lies in: democracy, human rights and good governance. How can we auction this trinity of our human salvation, for the sake of some profane patriotism? Government critics are more patriotic than our Executive can ever be!
____________
*This article was first published in Botswana's Mmegi
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home