If the Cape Times editorial (January 10) is anything to go by, 2005 will be a challenging year for those who believe in the value of a constitutional democracy.

Instead of questioning the ANC's statement condemning the mind-set of the judiciary, the editorial chose to interpret the DA's disquiet at the ANC's threat as polarising.

The DA has not misread the ANC's statement, as the Cape Times suggests. On the contrary, a re-reading only serves to deepen our concern. The ANC states that many judges do not see themselves as being part of the masses and accountable to them.

According to the ANC, this is a problem that must be corrected by a race-based approach to transformation.

In this statement, the ANC shows its contempt for, and complete misunderstanding of, constitutionalism.

The essence of a constitutional state is that judges (whatever their colour) are accountable to the constitution and the law, not to the masses or to the party that claims to represent their interests.

Follow-up explanations by ANC spokesman, Smuts Ngonyama, have only made things worse.

Taking the statement and explanations together, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the ANC is making the following point: when a judgment goes against the ANC, judges are actually ruling against the will of the majority.

They have no right to do that, especially if they are white. The administration of justice must be consistent with the policies of the majority party because they represent the masses.

This is the assumption that has destroyed an independent judiciary in some other countries on our continent. There are too many examples of the ruling party elevating itself above the law and the constitution.

Judges become extensions of the president and the executive, not a check and balance on their power. The ANC may not like the independent mind-set, but it is essential to the maintenance of democracy.

Our internationally admired constitution is a constant source of irritation to the ANC as it drives through its political agenda. The ANC has shown that, when necessary, it will not hesitate to meddle with institutions whose role is to limit government's power.

The latest revelations in the arms deal suggest that the independence of the Auditor-General, Shauket Fakie, was fatally compromised when he allegedly agreed to make substantial changes to a crucial report at the behest of powerful individuals.

The ANC no doubt thinks that Fakie had the right "mind-set". But if it is true that he buckled under ANC pressure to change the report, he will have betrayed the constitution and our democracy.

By opposing the ANC's attack on the judiciary, we are not resisting change. Far from it. Our purpose is to consolidate the fundamental changes of the mid-1990s when South Africa moved away from an authoritarian society and became a constitutional democracy.

If some interpret this commitment as polarising, it is a price we are willing to pay.

The DA would rather face this accusation than sit back and watch the erosion of the gains of the past decade.

Helen Zille MP, National spokeswoman for the Democratic Alliance Cape Town

With acknowledgements to Helen Zille and the Cape Times.