Nip undemocratic traits in the bud

THE house that Sam Matekane built is now on fire.

Hardly three months after his Revolution for Prosperity (RFP) was birthed, the party has struggled to shed its tag as an elitist entity.

There is a perception that this is a party that is led by individuals who have no real connections with the grassroots.

That disconnect between the leadership and the grassroots was on display for all to see this week.

It is a decision that could make or break the RFP come elections in October this year.

The RFP said it was reserving 11 constituency seats for the founding leaders to run in the general elections uncontested.

This has been construed as a desperate act of self-preservation by an embattled leadership that is out of sync with the realities on the ground.

The result is that there is now a lot of anger within the RFP grassroots supporters who feel cheated of their right to contest the elections on the party’s ticket.

All they wanted was a level playing field with every party member being given a chance to contest for the right to stand in the elections.

That has now been wiped out at the stroke of a pen.

The disgruntled RFP supporters however see this as a cowardly act by a leadership unsure of their popularity.

The majority of the RFP’s leadership are technocrats with very little experience of how they can successfully navigate the torturous world of politics.

If the RFP leaders were to allow themselves to be subjected to an open, democratic vote, there is a real fear that they stand no chance in hell that they will make it alive as the party’s candidates for the elections.

But they are not prepared to be sent packing from a party they formed.
That is why the RFP has strategically chosen to ring-fence these 11 seats.

However, the decision is a clear assault on democratic tenets.

The party must be bold enough to allow democratic processes to unfold within its structures.

Only when leaders are chosen through democratic processes will the RFP have the freeness of speech to criticise the sitting government and rivals within the political circles.

As it is, the RFP has opened itself to vicious criticism that it is undemocratic and that it panders to the “Big Man” syndrome that has been a bane of many a political party in Lesotho.
There is a sense that Matekane is the Alpha and Omega of the party. The RFP is Matekane and Matekane is the RFP. As the moneybag, his word stands.

To cleanse itself of this toxicity, the RFP must rescind its own decision to ring-fence any seats and allow party leaders to subject themselves to the will of the people.

Judging by the feedback we have received so far, Basotho have great hopes in the RFP. There is a real chance that the party could shift the power dynamics and inject a fresh group of young, talented Basotho who are untainted by the politics of the past 50 years.

The RFP must not squander that goodwill. It must deliver.

But that should start by the party’s leadership upholding basic democratic tenets.

Internal elections to choose candidates for elections is one of these.
This is an issue that must be handled with extreme care. By closing down democratic space, Matekane risks antagonising the base of his popular movement.

Instead, he should re-energenise the base which will be so critical to his political project. That base includes the ordinary citizens some of whom are now clamouring to stand for the party in the general elections.