128 were speculations that the introduction of the local government system was attributed to the phasing out of traditional chiefs by introducing elected leaders as councillors
countrywide. Most of the duties that were performed by chiefs shifted to local councillors.
This shift caused conflict between the two leaders and among citizens, who saw democracy as eroding the traditional leaders and their powers. However, chiefs were resilient and well entrenched within different communities and regarded as legitimate and permanent leaders without a term of office, unlike the new elected councillors who served for a specific term because they were elected, and, therefore, not permanent.
In terms of how Lesotho was democratized the responses have clearly shown that the transition phase or preparations for self-governance or independence were limited, weak or inadequate, as the first political elites were not well prepared. Therefore, when put in power, they continued the inheritance of an undemocratic colonial system of ruling in a modern democratic society, as can be seen in the next theme of modern democracy.
However, this theme also distinguishes between two phases of democracy – the transition phase until 1993, which included political instability and military coups – and the more benign period since 1998.
129 before they embark on any policy development and implementation
(Transformation Resource Centre [TRC] educator, Maseru).
Others confirmed that this also meant that the electorates contribute to public decision making:
…leaders from all corners are just representatives for the people, which is why it is government for the people by the people. It means that the people have a say in government and in issues that affect their lives in a country (Male politician, Qacha’s Nek).
Some of the older community leaders emphasized leaders’ responsibility and citizens’ duties and generally gave positive definitions of democracy:
Elected leaders should understand that they have to participate in governance and issues of development in their country. The citizens also need to understand and know what ought to happen plus what is right (Female chief, Qacha’s Nek).
It is where citizens are not told what to do or expect, instead they are the ones to determine what they want and how … I would strongly request people to respect democracy because it gives people a say in the decisions that affect their lives (Female politician, Qacha’s Nek).
It is the way where governance is in such a manner that people contribute towards how they are governed. It is government for the people by the people only when the people take part in issues that affect them or in governance issues (Development for Peace Education [DPE] educator, Maseru).
The introduction of democracy is articulated here as having brought freedom, which includes the notion that all eligible citizens can vote in elections and choose their representatives through electoral democracy, which is now practiced in Lesotho.
5.3.2 Democracy as Freedom
An understanding of democracy as freedom revealed dimensions of freedom of speech and participation that were mentioned by respondents. This has been illustrated by comments from leaders, educators and citizens across both genders in both districts. In considering freedom of speech they revealed:
… Freedom of speech is allowed: [for] the media and the people, while in the past [The period after 1970 until before democratic rule in 1993] people were kidnapped
130
… people are now having freedom of speech without fear like in the past [before 1993] (Male, IEC educators’ focus group, Qacha’s Nek).
Currently people have freedom to say what they want while it was not like that in the past before democratic rule in 1993. Any person is [now] free to complain about others while that was not happening in the past. [Even] Chiefs who misused people by sending them somewhere, [now] know that people are free to agree or to refuse.
In the past we [people] were not aware of our rights and responsibilities … it was authoritarian [rule] in the past during military rule and [even] before it (Female, IEC educators’ focus group, Maseru).
Freedom of speech is contrasted with the past time, during BNP rule after the 1970 elections, when the leader refused to cede power and ruled by force (Khaketla, 1971;
Machobane, 2001; Makoa, 2014). People could not discuss their opinions freely against those of the government, because if they did so they were kidnapped, sent to exile, or heavily punished. That suppression of the views and opinions of people extended to the era of military rule, which took place from 1986 until early 1993 when political parties were banned (Khaketla, 1971; Machobane, 2001; Makoa, 2014). The latter ruled by giving orders that were followed without questioning or acting against them. That oppression is not easily forgotten because that period lasted such a long time, from the post-independence rule by BNP from1970 to 1986, until it was further extended by military rule in 1986 to 1993.
Included in this past period is the era of traditional rule by chiefs, until 1993, when Lesotho returned to democratic rule. This period was enjoyed by one elite group of people, who were chiefs (BNP is formed mostly by chiefs; even most civil service positions were occupied by chiefs, including the military, who extended violation of rights and freedoms). The
commoners, who were members of the BCP and were the opposition party to BNP, were the ones who suffered acts of human rights violations.
Regarding freedom of participation, a chief in Maseru said:
It [democracy] means freedom of people who would participate and have a say in development issues (Male chief, Maseru).
When decisions are made in one’s presence it is easy to own them like other citizens because of the contribution that one has made. One becomes free … especially in contributing at the public gatherings (Female citizen, Maseru).
131 It is evident that respondents understand democracy as freedom, which means that citizens are free to do and say what they want without any restriction, which was not the case during the post-colonial period that lasted for 23 years before Lesotho became a democratic country. A female citizen in a focus group of the elderly in Qacha’s Nek even said “we now express our interests more freely than in the past before democracy was introduced.” This shows that the citizens were controlled during authoritarian rule, but now they exercise their freedom in a democratic state. Both respondents in Maseru and Qacha’s Nek revealed similar opinions regarding their understanding of democracy as freedom, meaning that, in both contexts the citizens had been affected in similar ways regarding the restrictions towards exercising their political rights in the past. For some Maseru based respondents, this freedom came with advantages that benefitted all citizens.
5.3.3 Democracy as Growth and Development
Democracy was also explained as having brought certain advantages to different people in terms of personal growth or wider development. This was only mentioned by respondents in Maseru, perhaps due to their higher level of literacy, knowledge and exposure to a wider resource of information giving institutions. Therefore, respondents in Maseru felt that democracy had brought advantages that had not been there during authoritarian rule.
These respondents claimed that the environment had changed and people had benefitted from that change. They expressed their views as follows:
It [democracy] enables a person to grow and display one’s own talents … it gives liberty and when exercised correctly that is a great improvement for a person because capabilities and potential are shown fully (TRC educator, Maseru).
Democracy brings development, people do things for themselves and they change with changing times because of civilization (Male citizen, Maseru).
It [democracy] has brought empowerment, shared responsibilities between citizens and government (Male citizen, Maseru).
The introduction of democracy has therefore been seen by some as according citizens a better treatment, which has improved their capacities and abilities beyond what they had experienced during the undemocratic rule of BNP and the subsequent military rule. People started to show and advance their potential in a favourable democratic environment that allowed them to do so. There was an element of inclusion and fair treatment of citizens
132 which had not been happening before this latter democratic period. The respondents stated that people were given chances to further their studies and sponsorships were provided upon merit instead of favouring the chosen few who belonged to a ruling government.
Respondents further stated that some even joined the associations of their choice and also participated in civil society groups freely without being intimidated. However, these
perceptions were not universal amongst the respondents. The issues of conflict and oppression during the dictatorship period introduced tension that appears to still linger.
Some observations suggested that the current exercising of freedom by some citizens has been abused.