In a democracy, government is empowered to receive resources from the people to render services to them. This requires transparency and accountability. The government has independent auditing establishments to ensure that its performance is assessed periodically through internal auditing units and annually by external auditing units.
Government, however, has to rely on policies to make decisions on a day-to-day basis. Some of these policies may not serve the public interest. The public may express dissatisfaction with these policies. The media may publicise the dissatisfaction. The government has the prerogative to acknowledge the expression of dissatisfaction and change the policies. It may also deem the policy to be appropriate and maintain it.
How far should citizens go to hold the government accountable in a democracy? The barometer is simple. They should remain within the bounds of the law to hold the government accountable so that they will not fall foul of the law enforcement agencies and the courts. Citizens must know what constitute lawful behaviour and unlawful behaviour. In that regard, one would know how far one should go in holding a government accountable without falling foul of the law.
Citizens have two powers that must be clearly distinguished when they are exercising their rights in peace without falling foul of the law.
First and foremost, they must exercise the power to hold the government accountable within the ambit of the law.
Secondly, where exerting their power within the ambit of the law does not lead to a change of policy by the government, they reserve the right to remove the government through the ballot and replace it with a government that will implement policies they deem fit for the people.
What citizens must avoid is to strengthen government by conducting themselves in a manner that will fall foul of the law and thus put themselves in the hands of law enforcement agents and the courts.
This would only lead to appeals for the government to show mercy and thus turn the fighter for truth into an object of pity. Methods of fighting rights where one has no power to change governments are different from methods where citizens have rights to change a government. Citizens that have the right to change a government must never adopt methods that fall foul of the law.
