This column, which is being written on the eve of the Bersih 5 rally for clean and fair elections on Nov 19, is dedicated to the majority of the people in Malaysia who are not directly connected with the protest, the Red Shirts’ counter-protest or the authorities whose task is to maintain the rule of law during the course of the demonstration.

The protest itself is an important statement about the state of democracy in the country as seen principally in the conduct of its elections, which must satisfy universally accepted norms in order to be considered a fair representation of the people’s will.

Turning to the people who do not see a place for themselves in a protest rally, it is notable that the list of those who cannot afford to join a demonstration is rather long.

For example, the parents of very young children cannot leave them with a caregiver for the length of time needed to join a downtown march, although this would by no means imply that the issues that prompted the staging of the rally are not highly pertinent to these parents and the welfare of their children whose future is in the balance.

Similarly, there are large numbers of people among us whose primary concern is to earn their wages for the day in order to put food on the table. For them, even a protest for a better income may be a luxury, let alone one that is concerned with abstract matters like democratic rights.

Then, there are many rural villages where farmers, fishermen, agricultural workers and their families live, for whom a trip to the city to participate in a rally is simply an unthinkable luxury.

The list goes on. The upshot of this reflection is that there is a whole universe of concerns that preoccupies a cross-section of the population that lies beyond the immediate battleground that forms the basis of the Bersih demonstration.

So, while Bersih 5 is a historic statement of the public’s outrage at the perversion of democracy in Malaysia, it is important to keep in view the larger field that is outside the focal point of the reform movement. This perspective can help to point the way towards modes of action that go beyond protest marches.

To take the idea forward, it can be seen that there is a larger backdrop of vital issues that are of immediate and urgent concern to millions of Malaysians that impact their lives and future prospects so greatly that they would warrant an endless series of protests, if protests are deemed to be the most pertinent course of action.

For instance, there may be equally compelling reasons to protest at the unhappy state of the education system, disparities in regional development, displacement of the local workforce, misallocation of public resources, rampant corruption, abuse of power, environmental degradation, under-resourcing of health services and so on and so forth.

For Bersih, certainly, after each round of mass protests, the question that grows ever larger is what is the way towards a systemic reform of our democratic institutions.

At this juncture, it is crucial to recognise that a more fundamental and sustained evolution of socioeconomic governance is required in order to improve the basic welfare of the people, which a symbolic protest cannot achieve. Concurrently, the focal point of the reformist movement should be enlarged to include a progression towards empowerment at the lowest ranks of society, capacity-building to enable informed and participatory decision-making, the promotion of economic independence and freedom from oppressive socio-cultural norms, to name some of the key areas for action.

After the dust has settled on the culmination of the nationwide Bersih 5 convoy, it will be time to buckle down for a ground-level transformation programme that addresses these basic issues.

Beyond this perspective, it is important to understand that a reform movement which seeks to transform national institutions — without translating the basic principles of democracy on which its agenda is based — into measures that engage the ordinary people in the routine exercise of these principles, will be bound to be superficially successful.

To illustrate, say a reform group succeeds in persuading a local authority to subject its operations to the democratic norms of good governance. In the award of petty trading licences, for example, it could make the selection process a public exercise where the criteria for granting licences are made known to applicants.

These criteria could include quotas for different communities, the prioritisation of disadvantaged groups and measures for promoting social justice. They could also include steps to prevent monopolistic behaviour and abuses such as influence-peddling, collusion among interested parties and so on. By opening its operations to public scrutiny, the local authority would be able to better serve the community by responding to the feedback it receives from its constituency.

Extending such a campaign to other local institutions, the reformists could engage schools, colleges and community organisations in the area to apply these principles in their decision-making processes. In this way, these institutions could promote the virtues of democracy by encouraging the participation of all groups in the community, foster public scrutiny of its affairs and instill a sense of ownership among its stakeholders.

Clearly, the systematic practice of democratic values in the basic institutions of society will help Malaysia to grow into a mature society in a short time. It only takes a willingness to walk the path.

R B Bhattacharjee is associate editor at The Edge Malaysia

Save by subscribing to us for your print and/or digital copy.

P/S: The Edge is also available on Apple's AppStore and Androids' Google Play.