By Lamino Lang Komma
It is common for all types of entities – including institutions, business outfits, and political parties – to experience periods of crisis or significant challenges during their existence. Such a crisis presents an opportunity to evaluate the quality of both existing and aspiring leaders.
This period demands dignified resilience and courteous assertive action, requiring the use of cultured approaches that would smoothly maintain and improve the organisation.
Over the years, the major opposition party, UDP, has encountered significant difficulties – difficulties that did not arise internally or concern leadership contests. Rather, the party faced a succession of external challenges aimed at undermining or even eliminating both the organisation and its leadership. These adversarial actions originated from the prevailing authorities.
The efforts of the authoritarian regime were met with resolute resilience, from a collective membership that showcased an unwavering support and strong commitment to a leadership that is perceived as reliable, committed and consistent. It indeed reinforced and maintained party unity.
The current situation facing UDP is not unprecedented within the realm of politics – vying for the leadership of a political party. In recent times, there has been a significant internal challenge to the party’s current leadership.
However, the intensity and enthusiasm of this challenge are unparalleled in the history of the party. It has never been reasonably anticipated that a modicum of discord in leadership may ever occur.
This novel and rigorous internal challenge has attracted numerous perspectives, both inside and outside of the party, that have been abundantly articulated in print and on social media. The debates have at times become quite contentious.
Never having faced such an internal crisis before, one can imagine the party undergoing a critical stage of self-appraisal and an internal fight for survival of its unity. Furthermore, as an organisation established on democratic principles and the principles of justice, it has been understood that any new aspirant for leadership should be accommodated and that the integrity of the democratic process maintained.
The situation constituted a significant crisis, which, despite earlier attempts to minimise its impact with self-assuring statements, the party was ultimately compelled to address the situation. The democratic process commenced, and the application period for flagbearer nominations officially opened. The time taken seems to suggest that the decision has been made thoughtfully and appropriately. There are lessons to be drawn.
Generally, a crisis does not hinder progress; instead, it creates opportunities to observe leadership qualities and to scrutinise displayed character during the period of uncertainty.
The experience serves as a testament to both the character and attributes essential for leadership in a party that has endured adversity under authoritarian rule and should position itself strategically for future advancement.
The current leadership demonstrates a commitment to maintaining unity while upholding democratic values aligned with the established priorities of unity of the party.
Conversely, the competitiveness (and sometimes unbridled assertiveness) can generally unveil the true nature of the character of all participants and stakeholders, which allows history to judge.
Thus, a crisis presents a constructive opportunity for evaluation and making informed choices about the future, ensuring progress under the guidance of a trustworthy leader with an upright and unimpeachable character aligned with the values of the organisation, institution or political party. It is a way of assessing the quality of leadership under the circumstances.
Given the party’s demonstrated resilience in overcoming significant challenges in the past, it is anticipated that this strength will lead to an optimal resolution once again.
The outcome will prioritise the collective interests of the party, fostering unity under the selected leadership and with the hope that the result will portray the sincerity of all contestants in accepting and conforming to the outcome; contrary to that, well, voters will decide and history will judge.
Just Thinking Aloud.
