Maravi

It is not wrong to question the actions of those in govt

It is not wrong to question the actions of those in govt
By The Post
Mon 18 Oct. 2010, 13:00 CAT

Sometimes one wonders if the leadership of the MMD and their followers really understand what it means to live in a multi-party or plural society. The fundamental value they seriously seem to lack is a respect for diversity and acceptance of pluralism. Gone are the days when everyone was supposed to think the same way, belong to the same political party, and support the same programme.

True believers in multi-party democracy welcome dialogue and debate over views contrary to their own because they realise that they themselves may not always be right. They recognise that there is a specific role to be played by each different organisation or individual in a spirit of unity amidst diversity. This value of respect for diversity and dialogue means a realisation that political parties are important but that they are not the only actors in a democracy.

And this is the point Fr Gabriel Msipu, vicar of the Catholic Diocese of Chipata, seems to be stressing when he says that it is not wrong to inform the government about the untold sufferings that Zambia is subjected to. Truly, as Fr Msipu observes, “holding different or opposition opinion does not mean this person is an enemy…Let’s learn to dialogue on important issues of national interest, to be tolerant of each other, to embrace other people’s opinions in humility and learn to accommodate other people’s feelings”.

A fundamental condition for the establishment of democracy is, therefore, the recognition of the rights of persons and social groups, be it children or adults, men or women, rich or poor, without any social, tribal or racial discrimination. A real democracy has to be built on the basis of justice and moral values and has to look to the common good. Democracy rests upon human rights. And these rights are not endowments from Rupiah Banda, or our government but the gifts of our Creator, and are enshrined in the Constitution of our Republic.

But true democracy, true multi-party politics is not possible without love for the fellow citizen. Human liberation is basically a question of moral and spiritual values: if a person sees the meaning of one’s life in one’s material well-being, accumulating wealth becomes an end in itself. “Eat and drink for tomorrow we will be dead.” If, on the other hand, a person sees the meaning of one’s life in spiritual values, that is the love of one’s neighbour, then material possessions become mere means towards an end.

Love for one’s neighbour frees a person from enslavement to one’s material possessions and enables one to use the power and riches of this world towards truly human ends, that is living a life of love in communion with God and one’s fellow humans. The radical transformation that is necessary to free a human being in the very depth of one’s heart from selfishness and greed is a gift from God. No one can give oneself this “new heart” (Ezekiel 11:18-19).

Where mere words fail to persuade, those in power may eventually be tempted to apply force, manipulation, intimidation. But you can only build a society with the free co-operation of all its members.

A human being finds fulfilment in committing one’s whole person in freedom to the service of one’s fellow human beings. But this is very different from forcing a person into a situation, even for a limited time, which allows little or no regard for his or her human dignity as a son or daughter of God.

And contrary to some perceptions, a healthy democratic society is not simply an arena in which individuals pursue their own personal goals. Democracies flourish when they are tended by citizens willing to use their hard-won freedom to participate in the life of their society – adding their voices to the public debate, electing representatives who are accountable for their actions, and accepting the need for tolerance and compromise in public life.

The citizens of a democracy enjoy the right of individual freedom, but they also share the responsibility of joining with others to shape a future that will continue to embrace the fundamental values of freedom and self-government. Democracies rest upon a principle that government exists to serve the people; the people do not exist to serve the government. In other words, the people are citizens of the democratic state, not its subjects.

While the state protects the rights of citizens, in return, the citizens give the state their loyalty. Under a state that is undemocratic, the state, as an entity separate from the society, demands loyalty and service from its people without any reciprocal obligation to secure their consent for its actions. Similarly, citizens in a democracy enjoy the right to participate freely in the public life of their country.

At the same time, citizens must accept the responsibility that such participation entails: educating themselves about the issues, demonstrating tolerance in dealing with those holding opposing views and compromising when necessary to reach agreement.


The essence of democratic action is the active, freely chosen participation of its citizens in the public life of their community and nation. Without this broad, sustaining participation, democracy will begin to wither and become the preserve of a small group of people and their organisations. But with the active engagement of individuals across the spectrum of society, democracies can weather the inevitable political and economic storms that sweep over every society, without sacrificing the freedoms and rights that they are sworn to uphold.

And active involvement in public life shouldn’t be narrowly defined as the struggle for public office. We say this because citizen participation in a democracy is much broader than just taking part in election contests. Whatever the level of their contribution, a healthy democracy depends upon the continuing informed participation of the broad range of its citizens. Accordingly, we see democracy as a process, a way of living and working together.

It is evolutionary, not static. It requires co-operation, compromise and tolerance among all citizens. Making it work is hard, not easy. Democracy embodies ideals of freedom and self-expression, but it is also clear-eyed about human nature. It does not demand that citizens be universally virtuous, only that they will be responsible.

As American theologian Reinhold Niebuhr said: “Man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but man’s inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary.” Democracy is in many ways nothing more than a set of rules for managing conflict. At the same time, this conflict must be managed within certain limits and result in compromises, consensus or other agreements that all sides accept as legitimate.

An overemphasis on one side of the equation can threaten the entire undertaking. If groups perceive democracy as nothing more than a forum in which they can press their demands, society can shatter from within. If those in power exert excessive pressure to achieve consensus, stifling the voices of the people, the society can be crushed from above. Clearly, coalition building is the essence of democratic action.

It teaches interest groups to negotiate with others, to compromise and work within the constitutional system and learn how to pursue their goals in a democratic manner and ultimately how to live in a plural society, a world of diversity. It is said that multi-party democracy is a system founded on the deeply held belief that government is best when its potential for abuse is curbed, and when it is held as close to the people as possible.

And judging by the record of the past 19 years of multi-party democracy, the two most decisive factors affecting the future consolidation and expansion of democracy in our country will be economic development and political leadership. We say this because economic development makes democracy possible; political leadership makes it real.

In a democracy, opponents or critics of those in power are not necessarily their enemies but they are partners in governing the country. Any society comprises a great diversity of interests and individuals who deserve to have their voices heard and their views respected. As a result, one thing is true of all healthy democracies: they are noisy. The voices of democracy are not only limited to those of the ruling political party and its government and supporters and the opposition, of course.

But they are joined by the voices of the Church and its religious leaders, the labour movement, organised interest groups, the news media, scholars and business associations, among others. All these groups should be free to raise their voices and participate in the democratic political process of their country without fear of being classified as enemies of those in power and the targets of their tyranny.

If this is allowed, it will act as a filter through which the vocal demands of a diverse populace pass on the way to becoming public policy. In the end, we get a government we deserve. And this is the point Fr Msipu is making, a point that we need to heed. We should learn to accept that all citizens have a right to participate in the shaping of their destiny directly without fear of reprisal.

It is quite true that acceptance of criticism implies the highest respect for human ideal, and that its denial suggests a conscious or an unconscious lack of humanity on our part. Intolerance must surely rank as one of the worst forms of immorality in human affairs.

Labels: DEMOCRACY, MMD

posted by MrK @ 5:35 PM