I don't think that the proposal to let non-governmental organisations (NGOs) contest in elections should be dismissed as trivial, akin to the Akujanji, or seen as an excuse to sideline the Election Commission's (EC) main task of conducting free, fair and clean elections ( Kit Siang tells EC to focus o­n fair, clean elections ).

Aren't opposition parties like DAP meant to serve as the watchdog to ensure that the EC performs its constitutional mandate, rather than see it sidelined?

There is every reason to allow NGOs to contest in what could constitute an important milestone towards the broadening of participatory democracy. NGOs are not confined to Cuepacs, which may be accustomed to negotiating and sometimes working, with the government of the day.

They will also include organisations like Sisters In Islam (SIS), Women's Aid Organisation, human rights organisations Hakam and Suaram, and language rights movement Suqiu, that are at the forefront in fighting for rights recognition for their respective interests in Malaysia.

To allow NGOs to contest in elections holds the promise of greater consultation and participation of different interest groups in the Malaysian political process.

For NGOs to step away from mere monitoring and criticising, to directly participating in an election is surely a major transition to a mature democratic culture of pluralistic rights recognition.

Taking the example of SIS. Surely the cause of ensuring justice is done to Muslim women is better served if it had been allowed to contest, win a parliamentary seat and have its executive director Zainah Anwar address parliament directly o­n the discriminatory provisions of the Selangor Family Law Enactment 2003. This goes beyond their capacity as an NGO, in merely urging for the postponement and review of their enforcement.

Civil society groups and NGOs here have evinced a record of commitment to not o­nly advance their respective agenda as interest groups but also in general to fight against corruption, abuse of power whenever this is manifested, and promote transparency and democratic governance.

Generally the individuals in these civil society groups are not there for money, political power or self-interest. Some like Irene Fernandez of Tenaganita have paid the price of being hauled to court many times for their beliefs.

Generally these individuals are well educated - like Chandra Muzaffar of International Movement for a Just World - but may not find politics as it is presently practised, palatable.

But this is the point isn't it? That politics as it is practised by our politicians o­n both sides of the divide (politics of money, and racial and religious zealotry) is far from satisfactory. Isn't it time for a change by infusing their ranks with new blood?

Admittedly, objections and difficulties are bound to arise in respect of such a move, not counting least the problems of finance and organisation. Foremost is what Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has said: that NGOs should not be allowed to function as a political party, as both entities play entirely different roles with different raison d'etre

The other objection in allowing NGOs to be elected, is that they will soon be corrupted by power and lose their original pristine objective of watchdog monitoring the very political process in which they are involved. Some even speculate that the suggestion is a ruse by the ruling coalition to 'corrupt' its NGO critics and bring them down from their moral high horse.

Rather, I think that NGO entry into politics will more likely help disseminate best practices of governance and transparency among political brethren in other parties. Whether or not they have the temperament for political competition, they should nevertheless be afforded equal access to participate in the political process, and should not be denied just by account of their status as NGOs.

If the principle of NGOs participating in elections is seen as worth trying for the better, the authorities have to make sure that NGO constitutions are amended to include election participation and that this application for registration as a political party is not refused by reason of not being pro-government.

It is therefore a matter of surprise to me that an advocate of democratic practice such as DAP national chairperson Lim Kit Siang should, so contrary to expectations, be dismissive of this suggestion. He should advocate and embrace it rather than to dismiss it as a red herring to sideline the EC's constitutional mandate .

The DAP cannot compete alone electorally. Being ideologically incompatible with PAS and now, Keadilan and PRM, it cannot form an informal electoral pact with BA without inconsistencies.

The DAP has greater common ideological ground with the NGOs from standpoint of pluralistic democracy. It is easier for the DAP to form an electoral pact with the NGOs in presenting political alternatives to Malaysians, than to informally co-operate with the Barisan Alternatif that has lost its vision.

For the longer term, the incorporation of NGOs into the political process not o­nly augurs well for promotion of a pluralistic democratic political culture for Malaysians in general but also a stronger platform for DAP in particular to re-invent its political relevance.