By James Sunday, FCAI, MNIIA
What many call negative criticism is, in fact, some of the truest, most sincere, and transparent views of citizens. These are unpopular opinions, not-so-favourable comments, and open feedback that those in government often dismiss as hostile. Yet, in developed and more advanced democracies, such opinions are seen as patriotic, nationalistic, and honest contributions.
They are the voices of citizens guiding, advising, pinpointing failures, and making governments aware of where they are falling short of public expectations. In reality, criticism is one of the best ways for governments to hear the truth directly from the people.
The choice of words often determines whether a critic is seen as “positive” or “negative.” But what matters is whether such criticism advances the cause of good governance. Critics are like oil that reduces friction in an engine, necessary for smooth functioning, but only effective when applied in the right measure.
Whether negative or positive, criticism that is reasonable, verifiable, truthful, and sincere, without malice or ulterior motives, will strengthen governance. However, when it becomes false, damaging, selfish, or deliberately destructive, it loses its value and can be divisive.
Critics should not automatically be branded as saboteurs or enemies of the state unless proven otherwise. On the contrary, criticism rooted in truth, transparency, sincerity, and patriotism should be respected. When government accepts and applies such feedback, credit and acknowledgment should follow, to encourage more openness in civic engagement.
Democracy, by its very nature, is not dictatorial, authoritarian, or feudal. It is a system of government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Elected officials are representatives chosen by citizens, and that mandate should compel them to deliver democratic dividends, not to act as feudal lords or taskmasters. A people-minded political elite must respect the rule of law and the rights of citizens as enshrined in the Constitution and in international charters.
The freedom of the press is also paramount to the success of any democracy. While regulation may be necessary to ensure responsibility, this must never translate into gagging the media or suppressing the truth. Globally, the press and government function as partners, referees that hold power accountable, draw attention to failures, and highlight abuses. This should not be mistaken for mere castigation or an attempt to embarrass leaders.
For unity, peace, and progress, the press must be allowed its rightful place as a contributor to growth, development, and good governance.