Public access to chances for political influence

Systemic monopolisation of political spaces by elites is disastrous to the ambitions of the average citizen who often finds himself reduced to a beggar status living off scraps falling off the oligarchs’ dining table. The configuration of our political systems must reset to empower the public.

The public needs to reclaim its power and no longer submit to the whims of the oligarchs to model the socio-political space and define public interests through their lens. Citizens must prioritise engagement and participation in systems that affect them.

Both individual and public power are important, but power in the public sphere, promoting collective action and community influence, is more crucial for fostering a just and equitable society than power concentrated in the hands of individuals.

We have made mistakes as the public, instead of protecting and using our power, we surrendered it to politicians and the elite who used it to create control satellites under the guise of improving security for everyone when all they were doing was to create legal barriers that would hinder the average citizen from participating in decision- and policy making processes.

Remedying the system is possible if we appreciate that the power in the public is stronger than the politicians in power. We may not have all the power we need to change the political structure to create opportunities for the average citizen to influence politics in Matabeleland and Zimbabwe, but we are prepared to use all the power we have to change what is clearly a dysfunctional system.

The only way to bring change is to be proactive and active. The voice of the public must not be silenced; we must never engage in any process where we are seen and treated as disposables. Communities must recreate the political landscape in their own image and eradicate the misalignment of political goals. This is crucial for the health of the sociopolitical space.

Goals of the elites do not become reflective of society’s needs simply because they have been systemically and deceitfully marketed as ‘national’ through the media ecosystem by their exclusive elite authors.

Remember, change does not happen to people, people make change happen. Change in the Matabeleland political space requires increased engagement and participation of the public in social and political matters.

While both citizen engagement and participation seek to achieve the same goals of improving systems and institutions so that they are effective in delivering public services, they are different in how they work. Citizen engagement is both formal and a top-down initiative from governmental bodies with officials actively encouraging citizen involvement in various projects. Citizen participation on the other hand is a bottom-up informal citizen initiative.

Citizen engagement provides vital opportunities for government and public interaction to identify opportunities for useful engagement and see off potential negative impacts.

However, as we engage, we must be wary of the risk of co-optation – the phenomena of being absorbed by powerful elites without gaining new advantages. Through co-optation, elites undermine movements by stripping them of their credibility as agents of change.

As alluded to above, citizen participation refers to voluntary activities undertaken by the public to influence public policy, both directly and indirectly by affecting the selection of policymakers through such processes as voting in elections, involvement in political campaigns, raising funds for a candidate or cause, contacting officials, petitioning, protesting, and working with other people on areas of common interest.

The quality of public engagement in politics matters as are the incentives for that engagement. Attending one-way rallies, town hall meetings in which officials regurgitate government/ elites talking points and ignore public interests does not reflect high quality of engagement.

Successful engagement and citizen participation in politics should be based on three fundamental principles:

1. Deliberative
   Citizens must be well-informed, given sufficient time and resources to process, explore and discuss issues among themselves prior to giving their opinion or recommendations to authorities. Citizens should be given enough time to shape their responses, questions and consider further topics for deliberation.
2. Responsive
   The engagement process should consider decisions and recommendations and provide feedback on subsequent courses of action.
3. Legitimate
   The citizens involved should be truly representative of the community they speak on behalf, or they will lose their legitimacy in the eyes of the public. Participants need to be chosen from a greater plurality of ideas and interests, so they are a fair reflection of society. Care must be taken not to under- or overrepresent certain population groups.
   

Increasing citizen access to equal opportunity for political influence requires both citizen engagement and participation. Citizens should be taking an active part not only in the process of selecting who governs them but also in the continuing conversation on how they should be governed. We believe increased citizens engagement in public decision-making ensures the actions of government reflect a greater plurality of views resulting in better-designed and more efficient public services.