Governments in a democratic country are elected by the people, but the people who really control the press are elected by no one. Yet it is considered right in a democracy for the media to be controlled by those who actually represent no one but themselves.

So said Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad at last month's international convention on Role of the Media in Non-aligned Countries.

Indeed, Mahathir has time and again drawn attention to the power of NGOs, the mass media and the judiciary in "subverting" duly-elected governments. He has often lamented that the electoral process is being put under the scrutiny of bodies which do not represent, or are elected, by the people.

True, shouldn't those elected be allowed to do their job? After all, if they don't, they can be booted out come the next election.

However, Mahathir's homespun logic, though compelling, should not go unchallenged.

Yes, there are good reasons for concern. Democracy can be subverted by powerful lobbies, be it pressure groups, big businesses and corporate cronies.

But it is important to stress that democracy is not about giving the elected government a blank cheque. Politicians must be held accountable at all times, and not only once in four or five years when voters go to the ballot box.

The real aim of democracy is the empowerment of the powerless, and elections are not the only vehicles to guarantee this.

The fourth estate

The French acknowledged such problems even at the onset of their experiment on democracy after the Revolution. They devised a checks-and-balances mechanism to enhance democracy. A provision was made for the separation of powers among the three arms of government - the legislature, the executive and the judiciary.

This was to ensure that the powers of the lawmaker, the prosecutor, and the executioner should not rest in the hands of the same group of people. And the fourth estate, the media, assumed the role of a watchdog to keep an eye on the other three estates which made up the parliament - the church, the aristocracy and the commoners.

It is recognised that while the majority has the right to form the government, democracy would not be reduced to a "dictatorship of the majority".

Indeed, democracy can only thrive in a society where there is transparency in government, public accountability and social justice.

More so, it can only thrive where there is freedom of the press. And the only way to ensure that is not to lament the fact that the media are unelected, but to democratise the media.

Granted, the media can abuse their sometimes awesome powers. The way to curb this is not to stifle it but to follow the examples of our neighbours and do away with the licensing system and set up independent media watchdogs such as a Press Council.

Let there be no monopoly of media ownership. Instead of restricting the media to a few political cronies, it should be liberalised. Let, dare we say, a thousand flowers bloom. Only then, can readers judge for themselves the sources of information they receive.

But the demand for press freedom and media diversity in Malaysia will not come from the National Union of Journalists, judging by the results of its recent biennial general meeting. Almost all the incumbents romped home for another two-year term.

The message from its members, who hailed from major mainstream newspapers, is clear. They want business as usual.

Which is why the hope for press freedom and ownership liberalisation will now rest on independent journalists such as the newly formed Coalition of Independent Media Activists and the handful of mainstream journalists who initiated the signature campaign two years ago demanding for the repeal of the Printing Presses and Publications Act.

They don't have NUJ's clout. But they have what NUJ obviously lacks - guts.