The Editor, Sir:

There is a much-quoted saying which states, "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance". If we believe that our freedom is integrally woven into the principle of democracy, we must show more vigilance in defence of our democracy. I am getting increasingly concerned that whether through ignorance or sheer contempt, our democracy is being threatened.

What is generally accepted is that in a democracy it is the will of the majority that prevails in the resolution of issues, while, care is taken to protect the minority from tyrannical oppression by the majority. It is not difficult to understand that representative democracy is the pragmatic way of practising democracy where the number of people is large and the frequency of decision making is high. In this form, the representatives are elected for periods not exceeding specified periods during which they are permitted to exercise the sovereign will of the people constrained only by whatever restraint imposed by the constitution which also empowers them.

Misunderstanding

Far too many have mistaken the privilege of the elected to act on behalf of the people as an empowerment giving unbridled right to the elected to do as he or she feels for his /her term in office. It is this misunderstanding that has transformed representatives to rulers. The significance of the difference must not be lost; a ruler does not require the approval of those he rules in order to impose his will upon them, while in a democracy the representative is required to represent the will of the majority of those he or she represents.

When confronted with the reality of a firm majority in favour of the retention of the death penalty for convicted murderers, some abolitionists have been suggesting that leaders must lead implying that leaders have a duty or right to impose their will upon the people when they consider it the right thing to do. The imposition of the leaders' will upon the people is not in keeping with the principles of democracy it is indicative of a dictatorship. In a democracy, if the leaders cannot convince the majority to support his idea or will he has two options, either accede to the will of the majority or graciously step aside allowing the people's will to prevail. Consciously, or not, those with the argument that "leaders must lead" are instigating the leaders to defy the wishes of the majority of the people they represent; those people are sowing the seeds of dictatorship. Sadly they are not the only planters in that vineyard.

Urgent constitutional matter

Those who by commission or omission allow the questionable removal of the Public Services Commission to prevail without the courts treating it as a very urgent constitutional matter are making their contributions. The turning of a blind eye to the matter of the eligibility of members of Parliament and the Senate; in keeping with the requirement of the constitution, they too are playing their part. When private memoranda of understanding are acceptable instruments of circumventing the constitutional requirement of the monopoly of the criminal prosecutorial powers of the director of public prosecutions, they too are playing their part.

While many are ignorant of the erosive and corrosive consequences of these seemingly unrelated occurrences, it does not negate the fact that the restraints imposed by the constitution are being ignored and circumvented thereby giving more power; not to the people but to those who rather to be rulers than representatives. A dictatorship can be established just as effectively by eroding the democratic institutions as it could be by means of a coup d'etat.

I am, etc.,

LUCIUS C. WHITE

1Tankerville Avenue

Kingston 6