|
The transformation of our democracy from a representative democracy to a participatory one would signal a positive democratic development. Traditionally, we have valued our democracy for its representative characteristics whereby the peoples’ choices represent them in parliament for a five-year period. During this five-year period the government of the day runs the country with little involvement or participation from the people. The people are simply called upon to cast their vote five years later. To many this is their only form of political involvement during this five-year period. With membership of the European community all of this should be revisited. It is time to move on to a participatory democracy where an increased say is given to civil society.
Civil society is a third sector distinct from government and business. It refers to the intermediary institutions like professional associations, unions, religious groups and citizen organisations, which give a voice to various sectors of society and enrich public participation in democracies. The elements of civic society are a free and vigorous press and a commitment to democracy and equal treatment of all citizens.
The growth of civil society has been one of the most significant trends in international development. In today’s world we all depend on each other. We realise only too well that social cohesion and prosperity can only be achieved with partnerships involving government, business community and civil society. The clearest public manifestation of civil society was the gathering of all thirty-four organisations in a common pro-European membership front on the eve of the European referendum. This was the catalyst for change, the very manifestation of an articulate and vocal civil society. It encompassed all the optimism, dreams, hopes, and vision for a European Malta.
We believed that it also would signify an effective transition from a representative democracy to a participatory democracy. We believed that with membership our government would give more space and voice to civic society. We augured that a culture would start nurturing a liberal democratic civil society where independent organisations would be given the space and the recognition to strengthen our democracy. We looked forward to less, more limited, government, more free associations and enhanced freedom of expression and the development of the civic cultures that value pluralism and individual liberty where respect for the needs of the community and a vision of the common good are paramount.
Regrettably, this culture is taking long to blossom, despite the setting up of local councils, still too dominated by the political parties, the occasional positive dialogue meetings with the Prime Minister and the numerous consultation papers. The Prime Minister is right to say that there has never been as much public consultation, however there is little concrete evidence that people’s rights as a consequence have been enhanced, suffice it to mention Qui-Si-Sana, Ta’ Cenc and Marsaskala.
The running thread throughout the provocative talk made by professor Jeremy Boissevain this week was the lack of involvement of civic society. He laments the lack of involvement of civil society on the MEPA board to ensure that citizen action opposing irresponsible and illegal developments are given a platform.
There is lack of truly representative citizenship everywhere. Government boards and agencies are far too often filled by ‘safe pairs of political hands’ rather than by persons chosen on the value of meritocracy committed to look after the common good. None, if any of the regulatory authorities include user representatives on the board. What stops government from including a consumer to protect the interests of the user on the Resources, Communications Transport and the Health and Safety Authorities? These entities financed by the taxpayer should be the effective voice and protector of the consumer. What better way to ensure this protection then by appointing them members of the authority?
A free independent and vigorous media is an essential ingredient in any civil society. Our public broadcasting service should be the voice of civil society and not the mouthpiece of government, the opposition and the institutions. Its ethos should be its public calling, giving prominence to the citizen rather than just the establishment. Alas, we are a far cry from this reality. Worse still, members of the Broadcasting Authority are chosen after consultations between the Leader of the Opposition and the Prime Minister. They sit to protect the interests of the parties and not of the citizens. Even independent personalities contesting local elections are given close to no coverage on our national station, hijacked by the parties.
Change in this country will not come about before there are substantial changes made to our electoral laws, which entrench the two party system. Both sides have a vested interest to protect the status quo; both fight tooth and nail not to change the system. Both parties are reluctant to give civil society the space it requires. Malta’s survival rests on civil society being given a fuller role. Let’s give civil society a chance.
|
