ONE of the general definitions of a democratic society is a society in which members of the public have the means to participate in the management of their affairs.
Under this definition, which is accepted world-over, information becomes the centre stage, especially that it must be open and free for all citizens wishing to participate in the affairs of their country.
In Zambia, this could be understood in terms of the citizens freely and safely using the media, both public and private, to air their views.
Whether the Zambian media have been fully utilised by the people for this purpose is, of now, a matter for conjecture.
However, democracy goes further than merely people having free access to the media. In a country that is still building and strengthening democratic institutions, democracy goes further, covering such areas as free participation in elections.
Since Zambia reverted to multi-party democracy more than two decades ago, those people who are eligible have been free to belong to parties they want to associate with. Similarly, Zambians have been free to choose leaders of their own choice.
In addition, the Zambian Constitution provides for Zambian citizens to form their own political parties which in times of elections sponsor them to contest the polls.
Thus, leaders of Zambia’s more than 30 political parties are free, under the Zambian Constitution, to jostle for the governance of the country.
At one time, this resulted into 11 such political party leaders standing as presidential candidates, with each one setting his/her eyes on Plot One.
Of course all these presidential candidates knew well the fact that at the end of the day, only one person would carry the day and occupy State House.
This then means that people form political parties for the sole purpose of competing with leaders of other political parties and, consequently, winning an election and be ushered into the governance of the country.
In this respect, those people who call for political pacts could easily be said to be countering the competitive spirit called for in a democratic society.
In any case, pacts have previously been formed but never produced the desired results. It happened once when the United Party for National Development (UPND) entered into a pact with the Forum for Democracy and Development (FDD) and the United National Independence Party (UNIP) for the sole purpose of defeating the Movement for Multiparty Democracy (MMD).
This goal was never reached because the MMD went on to win the presidential and general elections.
Other pacts have not even gone that far as they broke up before the elections, as it happened with the UPND and the Patriotic Front.
Some people later concluded that pacts never worked, especially if they were formed particularly to unseat the party in power.
And we may conclude that those people that have been calling for the formation of pacts have merely been trying to defeat the cause of democracy because parties were in the first place formed to enhance political competition among political parties so that the best party, one that in the eyes of the electorate could deliver, emerges the winner.
In this respect, salute the UPND, MMD and the Green Party whose leaders have already announced that they will contest the forthcoming presidential by-election on their own, not as pacts. OPINION