Once upon a time in St. Kitts, Democracy meant participation, fairness and justice. It was a system for the people, of the people and by the people. Participation and fairness were seen in the “one man, one vote” stipulation. Dissent was accepted because Democracy made provision for two or more political parties to persuade the electorate on which alternative seemed best for them. Where there was disagreement over the interpretation of the laws, the Justice System (the Courts) was there to settle the matter.
In such a system, the leaders are supposed to be guardians of democracy. As Dwight Eisenhower stated in 1953, “We, the people, elect leaders not to rule but to serve.” Bill Clinton opined in 1993 that “the central tenet of every democracy in the end is trust.”
The question we must now ask is, “How can we maintain our democracy when the leader entrusted with the job of guarding our democracy, cannot now be trusted? He has been cited many times as being “a stranger to the truth”. When matters were referred to the Court for interpretation, he has disregarded the injunction handed down causing his Attorney General to be convicted of “contempt of court”. And now in electoral reform matters, he is disregarding the voice of the majority of the electorate and instituting last minute reforms including boundary changes, even after the expiration of his allocated 5 years of tenure.
Our present practice of Democracy is more in keeping with the definition of Bertrand Russell (1928) when he describes it in this way:
“Democracy, as conceived by politicians, is a form of government, that is to say, it is a method of making people do what their leaders wish under the impression that they are doing what they themselves wish.”
It is obvious that our present system of Democracy as practised is terribly flawed-
-
FAIRNESS - one man, one vote – The Commonwealth Expert Team, in reporting on the 2004 elections had this to say: “We were able to establish that the names of eligible voters were excluded from the electoral roll and we did see evidence of this.” In addition, “that there were examples of more than one person voting under the same name since there is an absence of voter identification; that there were several examples of persons voting in constituencies for which ‘prima facie’ they would not by law qualify to be registered or vote.”
-
DISSENT – Anyone disagreeing with the Government is branded as being “unpatriotic’, a ‘destabilizer’, ungrateful, a ‘political stunt performer’ and even a ‘Hitler imitator’. Victimisation ensues. The Deputy Prime Minister proclaimed in public,”I hate to see PAM people getting through in front of Labour people.”
-
JUSTICE – By disobeying the injunction passed by the High Court, the Government has placed itself above the law. This totally debases the Justice System, an important stabilizer of Democracy. As we observe recent court battles, we are forced to query whether the Court is about Justice or about intellectually combating legal technicalities and utilizing “legal backdoors”. In such cases the spirit of the law and the context of the laws easily fall foul to the letter of the law, and ‘natural justice’ is eliminated.
The above indicate that Democracy as we knew it is truly on the rocks and the doors are opening to the onset of dictatorship. The latest rush into law of provisions for Island Constables is a sign of further militarization of our state. What else can we expect if this government takes another mandate, by fair means or foul?
In light of the above, much praise must go to the PAM leadership for organizing peaceful demonstrations. The demonstration organized this week illustrated that PAM is well aware of what was happening to our democracy and they stood up to take action in order to uphold and safeguard the standards by which we ought to live. They have become the true guardians of our fate. We cannot endorse the new form of slavery we see creeping in.
Like Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865), we must say:
“As I would not be a slave, so I wound not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy.”
