In our era of cultural relativism few unqualified statements can be made about politics. But Winston Churchill’s assertion that “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others” brooks no argument.

Societies where people freely express their opinions, freely choose their rulers, and have the right to due process are remarkably resilient and self-correcting. Democracies have won every major modern war, and their social records are just as impressive. The massive human problems created by the industrial revolution prompted Karl Marx to predict liberal democracy’s demise. Bourgeois society, he concluded, could not survive much less correct the rampant exploitations it had produced. Only an inevitable communist revolution and a dictatorship of the proletariat would remedy the evils of capitalism. But history has proven him completely wrong.

No modern dictatorship has ever brought anything but misery to its people. While every society allowing a free market of ideas and choices has generated eventual solutions to even self-created problems. Democratically legislated union and welfare laws have done infinitely more to improve the lot of workers than communist state decrees. Britain played a major role in creating the horror of plantation slavery. But it was also the first nation in history to not only abolish slavery in its dominions, but to actively fight for its universal elimination.

Twenty years ago Britain seemed a nation irremediably in decline and slipping inevitably from the ranks of first world countries. Yet the British people once more found the right leader for the problem. It was not always pleasant, but Margaret Thatcher’s harsh market policy medicine in time put Britain again at the forefront of nations.

Not long ago the United States looked on the verge of social collapse with soaring murder rates, crumbling inner cities and degenerating schools. But  its unfettered economic boom has reversed all these trends and turned New York, once the very symbol of urban decay, into a clean and crime-free city.

Things often appear worse in liberal democracies than in media censoring states, because a free press always exaggerates a nation’s ills - unfortunately sensationalism sells. But here too democracy seems to have built in protections against excess, for informed electorates seldom fail to separate wheat from chaff. The ‘people’ may be fickle and unpredictable at times, but they are not stupid. As Samuel Johnson said, whenever the mass of mankind think long upon any event, they usually think correctly.

The September 4^th Economist put it thus

“The liberal presumption in favour of the market, of capitalism and

indeed of freedom itself, is driven by intellectual humility: the acceptance that a process of constant experimentation, involving the freely expressed views and actions of millions of people, is likely to produce a better, more adaptable outcome than one involving a committee of economists, politicians, bureaucrats, businessmen or even journalists, drawing up a grand blueprint. This presumption is humble because it acknowledges the extent of our ignorance.”

All countries face challenges at some time. But countries which hold fast to democracy seldom fail to overcome their problems. While nations who choose the authoritarian route generally descend, sometimes irremediably, into chaos and arbitrary rule.

However bad things become in a democracy, one can be sure they would be worse if that country lost its freedom. During the great depression of the 1930s Britain and the USA held fast to liberal principles, while Germany and Italy slid into fascist dictatorship. Things did get pretty bad for the British and Americans. But their sufferings were nothing compared to what Germans and Italians had to endure under Hitler and Mussolini.

Jamaica is the third world’s most tried, tested and proven liberal democracy. We have endured many troubles and travails, but never has the authority of an elected government been challenged. Governments have made noises, but no newspaper has ever been shut down nor any journalist jailed. And apart from the ill-conceived and nearly tragic state of emergency in the 1970s, the concept of due process has held unquestioned sway.

In our current hard times, the nation’s first priority must be to preserve our full democratic heritage. And no principle is more important to democracy than the people’s right to know what their government is doing.

The proposed anti-corruption law is supposed to make public officials more accountable, yet section 6 (3) threatens those who reveal “confidential” information with a five year jail term and a $500,000 fine. This is theoretically designed to protect the privacy of public servants. But the Jamaican media has rightly protested with one voice that this clause would reduce its ability to properly investigate suspicious matters. Had this bill been law, the disgraceful public executive salary excesses revealed by Audley Shaw in parliament could not have been disclosed.

Only the hopelessly ignorant and biased could see the media’s tenacious crusade against this clause as a campaign against the present administration. The Jamaican press admirably covers the entire spectrum of political thought, from Mutty Perkins to John Maxwell. When such a varied sector unites in common cause, surely something more than petty party politics is involved. How can legislation which arouses universal condemnation among those attempting to inform the public be in the best interests of a nation?

Whenever there is a possible conflict between the letter and spirit of the law, sensible and well intentioned governments ensure that the latter prevails. For murky laws which could in the wrong hands become a shackle on personal freedoms can not be anything but a danger to democracy. If our legislators are truly interested in transparency and accountability, they must accept the media’s concerns as legitimate and seek a mutually satisfactory modification of this clause. If they do so, they will go a long way towards convincing people that whatever their failings and mistakes, our elected politicians are fully committed to the democratic process.

But if our parliamentarians insist on forcing through a bill which many see as the beginning of a campaign to muzzle the Jamaican press, they will have fully justified the opinions of those who regard them as sinister and unscrupulous charlatans. And such high handedness would be a nail in the coffin of Jamaican democracy.