In all democratic countries, the development of liberal institutions has been accompanied by the growth of political parties, acting as intermediaries between the electorate and the government.

Political parties have diverse and important functions. They promote popular interest and participation in the political life of the country. They present candidates for successive electoral contests and campaign on their behalf. They reflect the active interest of different groups gathered under their umbrella. They formulate policies, discuss issues and rally support for the government of the day and the opposition to it.

Democracy relies increasingly on the mobilisation of the electorate and each party has to build up a machine staffed by professionals to cope with organisation, economics and development, social issues, research, publicity, party finance and international links, among other activities

This calls for managerial ability if a political party is to have a political machine capable of inspiring mass support and taking on the responsibilities of government or effective opposition.

Power resides in the

grassroots

Party officials are supposed to be the servants of the party, the people who ensure that the motor works at full strength under the direction of the leadership. In a truly democratic political party, the leadership works in close consultation with other top politicians elected by the party grassroots.

In the case of Malta, the Nationalist Party elects an executive and an administrative committee and the Malta Labour Party elects a national executive committee to participate in the execution of policy but, in each case, it is necessary for policy to be discussed within the movement and properly constituted conferences to transmit messages expressing the will of the mass movement to the leadership.

On paper, the Nationalist Party general council and the Malta Labour Party national delegates conference are the supreme authorities in their respective movement. The writ of party authority is supposed to run democratically from the bottom upwards.

Practice belied theory

Unfortunately, there have been moments when practice has belied theory.

It is a matter for grave preoccupation that there have been known instances when the party bureaucracy, in the service of the party machine, has behaved as if the tail were wagging the dog.

The electorate caught glimpses of party functionaries holding power, acting in the guise of “strategy groups” or whatever, and short-circuiting the statutory edifice.

When this happens, the democratic process ceases to work and the authority of the grassroots is usurped to make democracy stand on its head.

This situation opened Pandora’s box and raised unanswered questions such as whether these functionaries take decisions as to how party funds are to be used and whose careers are to be advanced with the party. It is inconceivable that party bureaucrats should be in a position to regiment a democratic party from top to bottom and paralyse the democratic will. Yet the inconceivable happened, and its ghost was never exorcised. It has been judged on the test of its impact on the electorate.

Unfolding reality

Of course, it needs to be added that democracy is not limited to party activities.

In its widest dimension, democracy must rest on a vigilant society that does not permit the monopolisation of politics by party machines.

Today, the electorate is emancipated. Pluralism makes it possible for truth to combat error. The spread of education, the advance of communications technology and the age of the internet militate towards a new generation of voters more disposed to learn, to think independently and to assert their own rights.

This is not an ephemeral phenomenon, it is an unfolding reality, and punch-drunk political bureaucrats who ignore or challenge this reality do so at their own peril.

Every time they glorify their party, when an overtaxed electorate is groaning under their yoke of mounting austerity, their reputation takes a nosedive and each bombastic claim is considered as a sick joke. It is evocative of the theatre of the absurd.

What is to be resolved is what happens when two impulses conflict – when credibility and sheer experience stand in tension.

[email protected]