Maravi

We need a loyal opposition

We need a loyal opposition
By The Post
Sat 01 Oct. 2011, 11:10 CAT

One of the most difficult concepts for some of our political leaders and their followers to accept is that of the "loyal opposition". This idea is a vital one, however. It means, in essence, that all sides in a democracy share a common commitment to its basic values.

As we have repeatedly pointed out, political competitors do not necessarily have to like each other, but they must tolerate one another and acknowledge that each has a legitimate and important role to play.

When the election is over, the losers accept the judgement of the voters. No matter who wins, both sides agree to cooperate in solving the common problems of the society. The opposition, whether it consists of one party or many, can continue to participate in public life, with the knowledge that its role is essential in any democracy worth the name.

And as we have pointed out before, those in the opposition are loyal not to the specific policies of the political party in government, but to the fundamental legitimacy of the state, and to the democratic process itself.

Let us not forget that democratic elections, after all, are not a fight for survival, but a competition to serve.

A healthy democracy depends in large part on the development of a democratic civic culture that is the behaviours, practices and norms that define the ability of the people to govern themselves.

This has to be learned. We may all be born with an appetite for personal freedom, but we are not born with knowledge about the social and political arrangements that make freedom possible over time for ourselves and our children - such things have to be acquired; they must be learned.

And the democracy we talk about so eloquently is in many ways nothing more than a set of rules for managing conflict among us. This conflict must be managed within certain limits and resulting 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, the society can shutter from within. If those who have won the elections and have now formed government exert excessive pressure to achieve consensus, stifling the voices of the people, the society can be crushed from above.

Clearly, democracy is not a machine that runs by itself once the proper principles and procedures are inserted. A democratic society needs the commitment of citizens who accept the inevitability of conflict as well as the necessity for tolerance.

It is for this reason that the culture of democracy is so important to develop. Individual and groups must be willing, at a minimum, to tolerate each other's differences, recognising that the other side has valid rights and a legitimate point of view. Both need to meet in a spirit of compromise and seek solutions that are acceptable to both sides.

Compromise, consensus and coalition building is the essence of democratic action. We should learn to negotiate and compromise with others and to work within the constitutional system. We should learn to argue our differences peaceably and ultimately how to live in a nation of diversity. Democracy is pragmatic. Ideas and solutions to problems should not be tested against a rigid outlook but should be argued over and changed, accepted or discarded.

Let us govern ourselves in a manner that is fair and free. We should also realise that our nation comprises a great diversity of interests and individuals who deserve to have their voices heard and their views respected.

And the voices of democracy include not only those of the government and its supporters but also those of the opposition, the trade unions, organised interest groups, community associations, the news media, scholars and critics, religious leaders and writers, and so on and so forth.

All these groups should be free to raise their voices and participate in the democratic process. In this way, democratic politics acts as a filter through which the vocal demands of a diverse populace pass on the way to becoming public policy.

But why are we saying all this? We are saying all these things in the light of what appears to be negative political behaviour from the opposition, from UPND and MMD. MMD and UPND lost last week's elections to PF.

And they need to recognise the scale of their defeat and of their problems. As for MMD, people need a rest from them, and they need time to reflect and listen and come to understand their electoral defeat better. They certainly need to do a lot about themselves. They need better and different organization.

Those in UPND may need to spread their appeal and attract different sorts of people: different ethnic groups, social types and ages. Both MMD and UPND need to take a fresh look in the new circumstances. They need to renew themselves. The new people they will attract will be the engine of their revival. And as for PF, government and ministerial offices are theirs, but they must bide their time prudently.

Trying to frustrate the efforts of PF, if set as a political goal of the opposition, will result in political disaster for those involved in it. UPND has always over-valued itself, its leaders and its influence. This is a small party with 28 seats. It will not be possible to suddenly bring down PF which won 62 seats and has another eight nominated seats.

We know UPND did not want PF to win these elections and would have preferred MMD to remain in power - they were in an alliance of some sort with the MMD. And today they are choking with envy over PF's victory. Hakainde Hichilema used to accuse us of misleading Michael Sata and the PF that they can win this election on their own. And they won it on their own, without any alliance other than that with the people.

Most of the claims of UPND have come to be incorrect and untrue. There is need for Hakainde and his party to try and understand who they are, their limitations and their possibilities. They will not succeed to have Vernon Mwaanga as Speaker and a UPND candidate as Deputy Speaker. They are a minority and will not be kingmakers in this situation.

If they continue with this attitude, even their position in Southern Province will start to weaken and they will move from being a Bantustan party to nothing. They will do better to start showing people that they have humility and that they can be modest. Let them show our people that politics is not a dirty game but the art of improving ourselves and the world we live in, a real and meaningful part of our lives.

Let them show our people that politics is an expression of a desire to contribute to the happiness of the community rather than of a need to cheat or manipulate.

They should wish the new PF government well. They should be patriots who wish to see their country succeed with or without them. And indeed, with or without them, this country will move forward. They should not look to defeat the PF on the back of national failure or political crisis.

There will be sufficient ground without that to argue for their removal at the next elections. Today PF looks very strong and confident. But problems lie ahead. PF will in the end be judged not on what they say but what they do. The wheel of fortune turns and that which once appeared fresh, with the passing of time goes to seed.

Labels: MMD, PF, POLITICS

posted by MrK @ 3:46 PM