REACTIONS TO the news that former first lady, Nana Konadu Agyemang-Rawlings, who turns 62 on November 17 and is preparing to contest for the flag-bearership of the ruling NDC in 2012, have been extreme. Majority of the vociferous voices say it would be a disaster. But, how true is this?
She is arguably the most politically exposed and politically experienced Ghanaian female around. She was an active First Lady for 19 years, whose mobilisation prowess is legendary.
This is a woman who runs a women's movement (31st December Women's Movement), which at one time boasted of a two-million membership nationwide.
She has described it as a “broad based development oriented Non-Governmental Organisation that aspires to achieve [its] objectives through the effective mobilisation of women.”
In her, the NDC has a woman who has a solid three-decade record of mass mobilization; A woman who has the confidence to mix with the shakers and movers of the world; A woman who will die for the party; A woman with a handbag filled with iron balls and who is not afraid to swing it.
So if Ghana is ready for a female presidential candidate, then Mrs. Rawlings is a credible candidate. She more than qualifies.
But, would it be wise for her to stand against a sitting president, in a presidential primary? The fact that it didn't happen to Messrs Rawlings and Kufuor does not mean the prospect of her candidacy should be dismissed outright.
President Rawlings faced no opposition in 1996 because it was his ‘personal’ party and his popularity was never in doubt.
After all, he single-handedly decided for the party who his successor should be. President Kufuor did not face any challenge in 2004 because he had run the country credibly, and his popularity was not in doubt.
Can the same be said of President Mills today? Certainly not. Don't forget Mills is in a position quite similar to what the Democrats faced in the 1960s.
Nixon had earlier lost to JFK by a margin of 0.2%. Nixon sought for re-nomination as the Republican presidential candidate and won.
With his nationwide popularity assured, he came back and won the presidency. It is not cast in stone that incumbent presidents should not be challenged by their party members.
That decision is a calculated one based on prevailing pros and cons - chances of the party being re-elected or defeated by sticking to the incumbent leader. The NDC cannot leave anything to chance.
They should allow those positioning themselves to challenge Mills to do so, or risk being stuck with a losing candidate in 2012. The prospect of a challenge may even challenge President Mills to make a more serious attempt towards delivering a better Ghana than he is so far managing to do.
Also, in spite of all his threats of seeking a second term, it is far from certain that Mills will be in contention in 2012. That decision may not be entirely his to make.
But, with some 2,000 delegates to decide who leads the NDC in 2012 (in the event of a contest), any serious challenge against Mills will call for a significant expansion of the party's electoral college.
The NDC has next year's annual national conference to effect any such constitutional reforms. It should not be seen as an anti-Mills expansion, but rather an expansion for the sake of the party.
In 2007, it was the small size of the electoral college of the NPP that encouraged 17 people with some loose change (money to spare) to throw their hat into the NPP ring.
In the end, that orgy of ego trip cost the party dearly, in portraying it as corrupt, and in dividing the front. It prevented the eventual winner from going into the 2008 election with a clear mandate from his own party. A bigger electoral college will be a better test of the popularity of whoever emerges as the 2012 NDC candidate.
If Mills believes he is popular within his party, then let him sponsor such an exercise and take away probable allegations of vote-buying.
Ghanaians should not find it politically profane the fact that the wife of a former president may be thinking of contesting to be president. Exactly two years ago, Americans were preparing themselves for a possible President Hillary Clinton.
The world's longest serving female leader, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi of India, was born into the politically influential Nehru family. Her grandfather, Motilal Nehru, was a prominent Indian nationalist leader. Her father, Jawaharlal Nehru, was the first Prime Minister of Independent India.
The late Benazir Bhutto, twice prime minister of Pakistan, was the first woman elected to lead a Muslim state. She was the eldest child of former Pakistani Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, and was the wife of current Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari.
In Mongolia, Suhbaataryn Yanjmaa, who became Head of State between 1953 and 1954, was the widow of national hero Sühbaatar, and arguably the absolute first woman political ruler in contemporary history.
Between 1968-1972, Song Qingling, the widow of doctor Sun Yat-sen, the founder of the Chinese Republic, and the sister-in-law of Marshall Chiang Kai-shek, his successor as president of the Republic of China (then Taiwan), was co-president of the People's Republic of China.
Indeed, from 31 Oct 1968, to 24 Feb 1972, no Head of State was mentioned in the communist state, but Dong Biwu and Song Qingling were Vice Presidents by then (she was elected to the post in 1954, after being deputy premier since 1949), so, de facto (and in theory), both leaders shared the presidential duties in 1968-1972.
Furthermore, when in 1976, Zhu De, who was then the head of state and chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (the presidency of the Republic was officially abolished the previous year), passed away, a vacancy period was inaugurated and not filled until 1978, with the appointment of Ye Jianying.
In these months were the 21 vice-chairmen, among them four women: Song Qingling, Cai Chang, Li Suwen, and (from 2 Dec 1976) Deng Yingchao, the widow of just deceased premier Zhou Enlai. Shortly before Song's death, she was elected “Honorary President” of the People's Republic of China.
In Argentina, Maria Estela ‘Isabel’ Martinez de Peron, served as president from 1 Jul 1974 to 24 Mar 1976.
She replaced her husband Juan Domingo Perón as president, immediately after his death, since she held the Vice-Presidency of the Republic and the presidency of the Senate since the 1973 electoral victory of the 'Perón-Perón' formula. In fact, Perón's incapacitation forced her to act as president since Jun 29.
She was the first woman who became president, both in America and in the world. And also was the first one ousted in a military coup.
Cory Aquino of the Philippines is another example of a widow who succeeded her husband as president. After Benigno Aquino's assassination in 1983, she became Asia's first woman president.
The widow of Pedro Joaquín Chamorro, assassinated in 1978, also became the president of Nicaragua from 1990 to 1997.
Chandrika Kumaratunga, the daughter of the late Sirimavo Bandaranaike, three times prime minister of Sri Lanka, served both as prime minister and president, and both through democratic elections.
Upon her election as president in 1994, the daughter appointed her mother as prime minister.
Chandrika's father and Sirimavo's husband, Solomon, was assassinated while being prime minister in 1959. The same thing happened to Chandrika's husband, Vijaya Kumaratunga, who also assassinated in 1988.
Until 2009, Janet Jagan was the President of Guyana. She was also prime minister in 1997. She succeeded her husband, Cheddi Jagan, in the presidency, some months after his passing.
The sixth woman occupying the presidential office in America, and the second one with an additional premiership experience in the world (the first one was Sri Lanka's Chandrika Kumaratunga), Mireya Elisa Moscoso de Arias, the first woman president of Panama, also took advantage of her status as widow of former president Arnulfo Arias Madrid.
Maria Arroyo, the current president of the Philipines, is the daughter of late president Diosdado Macapagal, and the country's second woman president.
Certainly, Mrs. Rawlings has plenty of international precedent to support her bid. Her challenge is finding enough party support to finally make good this two-decade long ambition of hers.
For people like Nii Lamptey Vanderpuye, the presidential aide who dismisses her bid with contempt, they should be reminded that she was even more responsible for the formation of the party they belong to today than even her husband.
In 1992, Kojo Tsikata and co, the CPP elements within the PNDC, were happy to piggy back an Nkrumaist vehicle, like Kweku Boateng's NCCP.
It was Konadu Agyemang-Rawlings, who managed to convince Obed Asamoah to support the project of going alone to set up a new party.
The others were very sceptical, but she was not. I guess the same forces are today sceptical about her chances as presidential candidate. They should know by now that the lady is not for writing-off.
qanawu.blog.spot.com
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Goodbye Brown, hello Cameron, welcome Clegg
Britain goes to the polls today. The main candidates are Gordon Brown of Labour, David Cameron of the main opposition Conservatives and Nick Clegg of the Liberal Democrats. Labour supporters and members of parliament are bracing themselves for a humiliating defeat today.
Thirteen years of Labour Party rule in Britain has taken its toll. The wind of change that blew across the Atlantic from America to Ghana has made a vertical shoot via the Greenwich Meridian to the UK. The campaign slogan of the main opposition party in the UK is “Vote for Change”.
Yet the outcome of the UK general election on May 6 is by no means certain. To use the cover story of the Focus on Africa Magazine in 2008 on the Ghanaian elections, it is ‘Too Close To Call’. About a year ago, today was supposed to be a done deal for the younger Cameron. That the Conservative leader should be going into today's poll with the result far too close to call is a surely a testament to the humiliating deficiencies of his campaign, according to one commentary.
David Cameron, the 43 year-old leader of the Conservative Party, a contemporary of mine in the Young Conservatives (the Tory youth win) during university years, would have had an easier go at getting the needed majority to form the next government, but he has not been able to deal decisively with serious doubts about his experience, capability and substance as a formidable politician.
Until today, out of a total of 646 seats, Labour controlled 345 seats, the Conservative Party 193, Liberal Democrats (Lib Dems) 63. Dr Brown led with a working majority of 56, less 289 of all other parties - excluding Speaker & Deputies and the 5 Sinn Fein MPs who refused to take their seats at Westminster).
Yesterday, YouGov opinion poll left the Conservatives on 35%, the Lib Dems on 24% (down 4) and Labour on 30% (+2). The last two days saw the three candidates doing night shifts all in a bid to win over the floating voters. Of the 116 marginal/swing constituencies, the Conservatives need to win to form an overall majority, 26 are held by Lib Dem and 90 are Labour. Nine of them could go to any of the three parties and 81 are LAB-CON marginals.
It is for this reason that in the last few days, Labour has been calling for tactical voting in favour of Lib Dem in areas that they know Labour can by no means unseat the Tories. They are also calling on Lib Dem sympathisers to give their votes to Labour to keep out the Tories. If this anti-Tory pact works, Labour would end up holding on to 81 seats, while the Lib Dems would hold on to 26 and gain nine.
Tactical voting is defined as a conscious decision by a voter to back a party other than the one they support, in a pragmatic bid to secure a more desirable result in their constituency.
But, Qanawu does not expect a large shift in support from Lib Dem to Labour. Labour has gone stale. Nobody doubts Mr Brown’s handling of the recession-hit UK economy. Yet, Britons have seen their living standards suffered in the last couple of years and there can be no scapegoat as convenient as the incumbent government.
As the Daily Express believes only David Cameron can save Britain, telling readers “David Cameron has decisively won the case for change. But he needs a clear mandate. So the Daily Express urges readers to vote Conservative tomorrow. The future of our nation is at stake.”
In fact, out of the 15 most influential newspapers in the UK, two (Guardian and Observer) have shifted from Labour to Lib Dem, only one, the Mirror, is for Labour while advocating tactical voting for Lib Dem. The rest are all for the Conservative Party, including the Financial Times, Times and the Observer, which had not supported the Tories for at least 18 years.
As if it is an European conspiracy, just yesterday, the European Commission warned that the British budget deficit will swell this year to become the biggest in the European Union, overtaking even Greece. The EC’s spring economic forecasts put the UK deficit for this calendar year at 12% of GDP, the highest of all 27 EU nations and worse than the Treasury's own forecasts. It is also likely to help the Conservatives because there are doubts that a hung parliament will have the clout to rapidly reduce the deficit. A hung parliament is when no single party has enough seats to form a majority government on its own.
The Conservatives are likely to win their fight to oust the ruling Labour Party, but it is clear that no one party is likely to have an overall majority. The last time Britain had a hung parliament was in 1974 and that was short-lived because the cabinet could not even agree on how refuse should be collected. What seems obvious, despite all the scare tactics of the last few days is that the old voting system which produced a two-and-a-half party system in British politics will change from today. The smaller Lib Dem has finally arrived, a fate that our own Nkrumaist parties have not been able to achieve since 1992.
The inexperienced, Eton-educated Cameron has managed to give the Tories a new, soft image from the old haughty right-wing image. But, bringing the Tories to the centre has only made it more difficult for the voters to differentiate between the two main parties. In 1997 when Britons voted for change after 18 years under the Tories, there was a clear delineation between left and right, between Conservative and Labour. Now the lines are blurred.
This has forced the Liberals to be more left wing than the social democrats of Labour. The Lib Dems know that their only hope of having a piece of the governing cake is through a coalition.
Paul Stone, the public law expert at DLA Piper argues that a coalition government can lead to laws that are “often watered down to the point of being anodyne as a result of endless rounds of review and compromise”. Ironically, the wife of Nick Clegg (the apostle of coalition) works for DLA Piper.
Nick Clegg said in Durham called out to Britons to come out and vote in their numbers. “It might be a small cross [on the ballot paper] but it will be a big step towards a better, fairer Britain,” he says.
Like Dr Kwesi Nduom in 2008, Nick Clegg’s star shone the brightest in the first debate, with his purported disdain for the “old politics”, and taking easy pot shots at the other two. But, unlike Nduom, Clegg has managed to stay significant in the polls after the debates. Cleggmania had sustainability.
Desperate Brown is did a lot of walking, talking and even smiling with more confidence, shaking more greasy factory hands and carrying more pampers-wearing babies than he thought necessary some weeks ago. This is very different to the earlier campaign, which was all about getting the PM to meet his supporters in controlled environments.
“I know there are people who say, or hope, that the election is already over. But I tell you that tomorrow is the time for the thousands of people to speak for themselves. Tomorrow doesn't belong to the press, to the commentators, to the insiders, to the vested interests or even to the political parties. Tomorrow your voice shall be heard and your vote will determine the direction of this country.” That was Brown yesterday.
But my prediction is that he would be forced to resign on May 7 and with Labour having a new leader, and the conservatives just falling short of a working majority there is every chance for Clegg to be a kingmaker, forming a coalition government with Labour under a new leader. I certainly hope David triumphs and deliver a brighter Britain.
The Daily Telegraph, in backing David Cameron reminds readers that the Conservative is still “Built on the concept that the state should do less, better, and that decisions are best taken as closely as possible to where they impact, it addresses the straitened circumstances of the time...”
The Sunday Telegraph editorial still believes that there is a marked difference between the two main parties: “Despite the parties' attempts to capture the all-important middle ground, the differences between them are clear. Labour believes that only the state can solve the country's economic and social problems. The Conservatives, by contrast, believe that the growth of the central state is the cause of the problem, not its solution, and want to call upon the invigorating power of citizens and communities.”
qanawu.blogspot.com
Thirteen years of Labour Party rule in Britain has taken its toll. The wind of change that blew across the Atlantic from America to Ghana has made a vertical shoot via the Greenwich Meridian to the UK. The campaign slogan of the main opposition party in the UK is “Vote for Change”.
Yet the outcome of the UK general election on May 6 is by no means certain. To use the cover story of the Focus on Africa Magazine in 2008 on the Ghanaian elections, it is ‘Too Close To Call’. About a year ago, today was supposed to be a done deal for the younger Cameron. That the Conservative leader should be going into today's poll with the result far too close to call is a surely a testament to the humiliating deficiencies of his campaign, according to one commentary.
David Cameron, the 43 year-old leader of the Conservative Party, a contemporary of mine in the Young Conservatives (the Tory youth win) during university years, would have had an easier go at getting the needed majority to form the next government, but he has not been able to deal decisively with serious doubts about his experience, capability and substance as a formidable politician.
Until today, out of a total of 646 seats, Labour controlled 345 seats, the Conservative Party 193, Liberal Democrats (Lib Dems) 63. Dr Brown led with a working majority of 56, less 289 of all other parties - excluding Speaker & Deputies and the 5 Sinn Fein MPs who refused to take their seats at Westminster).
Yesterday, YouGov opinion poll left the Conservatives on 35%, the Lib Dems on 24% (down 4) and Labour on 30% (+2). The last two days saw the three candidates doing night shifts all in a bid to win over the floating voters. Of the 116 marginal/swing constituencies, the Conservatives need to win to form an overall majority, 26 are held by Lib Dem and 90 are Labour. Nine of them could go to any of the three parties and 81 are LAB-CON marginals.
It is for this reason that in the last few days, Labour has been calling for tactical voting in favour of Lib Dem in areas that they know Labour can by no means unseat the Tories. They are also calling on Lib Dem sympathisers to give their votes to Labour to keep out the Tories. If this anti-Tory pact works, Labour would end up holding on to 81 seats, while the Lib Dems would hold on to 26 and gain nine.
Tactical voting is defined as a conscious decision by a voter to back a party other than the one they support, in a pragmatic bid to secure a more desirable result in their constituency.
But, Qanawu does not expect a large shift in support from Lib Dem to Labour. Labour has gone stale. Nobody doubts Mr Brown’s handling of the recession-hit UK economy. Yet, Britons have seen their living standards suffered in the last couple of years and there can be no scapegoat as convenient as the incumbent government.
As the Daily Express believes only David Cameron can save Britain, telling readers “David Cameron has decisively won the case for change. But he needs a clear mandate. So the Daily Express urges readers to vote Conservative tomorrow. The future of our nation is at stake.”
In fact, out of the 15 most influential newspapers in the UK, two (Guardian and Observer) have shifted from Labour to Lib Dem, only one, the Mirror, is for Labour while advocating tactical voting for Lib Dem. The rest are all for the Conservative Party, including the Financial Times, Times and the Observer, which had not supported the Tories for at least 18 years.
As if it is an European conspiracy, just yesterday, the European Commission warned that the British budget deficit will swell this year to become the biggest in the European Union, overtaking even Greece. The EC’s spring economic forecasts put the UK deficit for this calendar year at 12% of GDP, the highest of all 27 EU nations and worse than the Treasury's own forecasts. It is also likely to help the Conservatives because there are doubts that a hung parliament will have the clout to rapidly reduce the deficit. A hung parliament is when no single party has enough seats to form a majority government on its own.
The Conservatives are likely to win their fight to oust the ruling Labour Party, but it is clear that no one party is likely to have an overall majority. The last time Britain had a hung parliament was in 1974 and that was short-lived because the cabinet could not even agree on how refuse should be collected. What seems obvious, despite all the scare tactics of the last few days is that the old voting system which produced a two-and-a-half party system in British politics will change from today. The smaller Lib Dem has finally arrived, a fate that our own Nkrumaist parties have not been able to achieve since 1992.
The inexperienced, Eton-educated Cameron has managed to give the Tories a new, soft image from the old haughty right-wing image. But, bringing the Tories to the centre has only made it more difficult for the voters to differentiate between the two main parties. In 1997 when Britons voted for change after 18 years under the Tories, there was a clear delineation between left and right, between Conservative and Labour. Now the lines are blurred.
This has forced the Liberals to be more left wing than the social democrats of Labour. The Lib Dems know that their only hope of having a piece of the governing cake is through a coalition.
Paul Stone, the public law expert at DLA Piper argues that a coalition government can lead to laws that are “often watered down to the point of being anodyne as a result of endless rounds of review and compromise”. Ironically, the wife of Nick Clegg (the apostle of coalition) works for DLA Piper.
Nick Clegg said in Durham called out to Britons to come out and vote in their numbers. “It might be a small cross [on the ballot paper] but it will be a big step towards a better, fairer Britain,” he says.
Like Dr Kwesi Nduom in 2008, Nick Clegg’s star shone the brightest in the first debate, with his purported disdain for the “old politics”, and taking easy pot shots at the other two. But, unlike Nduom, Clegg has managed to stay significant in the polls after the debates. Cleggmania had sustainability.
Desperate Brown is did a lot of walking, talking and even smiling with more confidence, shaking more greasy factory hands and carrying more pampers-wearing babies than he thought necessary some weeks ago. This is very different to the earlier campaign, which was all about getting the PM to meet his supporters in controlled environments.
“I know there are people who say, or hope, that the election is already over. But I tell you that tomorrow is the time for the thousands of people to speak for themselves. Tomorrow doesn't belong to the press, to the commentators, to the insiders, to the vested interests or even to the political parties. Tomorrow your voice shall be heard and your vote will determine the direction of this country.” That was Brown yesterday.
But my prediction is that he would be forced to resign on May 7 and with Labour having a new leader, and the conservatives just falling short of a working majority there is every chance for Clegg to be a kingmaker, forming a coalition government with Labour under a new leader. I certainly hope David triumphs and deliver a brighter Britain.
The Daily Telegraph, in backing David Cameron reminds readers that the Conservative is still “Built on the concept that the state should do less, better, and that decisions are best taken as closely as possible to where they impact, it addresses the straitened circumstances of the time...”
The Sunday Telegraph editorial still believes that there is a marked difference between the two main parties: “Despite the parties' attempts to capture the all-important middle ground, the differences between them are clear. Labour believes that only the state can solve the country's economic and social problems. The Conservatives, by contrast, believe that the growth of the central state is the cause of the problem, not its solution, and want to call upon the invigorating power of citizens and communities.”
qanawu.blogspot.com
Goodbye Brown, hello Cameron, welcome Clegg
Britain goes to the polls today. The main candidates are Gordon Brown of Labour, David Cameron of the main opposition Conservatives and Nick Clegg of the Liberal Democrats. Labour supporters and members of parliament are bracing themselves for a humiliating defeat today.
Thirteen years of Labour Party rule in Britain has taken its toll. The wind of change that blew across the Atlantic from America to Ghana has made a vertical shoot via the Greenwich Meridian to the UK. The campaign slogan of the main opposition party in the UK is “Vote for Change”.
Yet the outcome of the UK general election on May 6 is by no means certain. To use the cover story of the Focus on Africa Magazine in 2008 on the Ghanaian elections, it is ‘Too Close To Call’. About a year ago, today was supposed to be a done deal for the younger Cameron. That the Conservative leader should be going into today's poll with the result far too close to call is a surely a testament to the humiliating deficiencies of his campaign, according to one commentary.
David Cameron, the 43 year-old leader of the Conservative Party, a contemporary of mine in the Young Conservatives (the Tory youth win) during university years, would have had an easier go at getting the needed majority to form the next government, but he has not been able to deal decisively with serious doubts about his experience, capability and substance as a formidable politician.
Until today, out of a total of 646 seats, Labour controlled 345 seats, the Conservative Party 193, Liberal Democrats (Lib Dems) 63. Dr Brown led with a working majority of 56, less 289 of all other parties - excluding Speaker & Deputies and the 5 Sinn Fein MPs who refused to take their seats at Westminster).
Yesterday, YouGov opinion poll left the Conservatives on 35%, the Lib Dems on 24% (down 4) and Labour on 30% (+2). The last two days saw the three candidates doing night shifts all in a bid to win over the floating voters. Of the 116 marginal/swing constituencies, the Conservatives need to win to form an overall majority, 26 are held by Lib Dem and 90 are Labour. Nine of them could go to any of the three parties and 81 are LAB-CON marginals.
It is for this reason that in the last few days, Labour has been calling for tactical voting in favour of Lib Dem in areas that they know Labour can by no means unseat the Tories. They are also calling on Lib Dem sympathisers to give their votes to Labour to keep out the Tories. If this anti-Tory pact works, Labour would end up holding on to 81 seats, while the Lib Dems would hold on to 26 and gain nine.
Tactical voting is defined as a conscious decision by a voter to back a party other than the one they support, in a pragmatic bid to secure a more desirable result in their constituency.
But, Qanawu does not expect a large shift in support from Lib Dem to Labour. Labour has gone stale. Nobody doubts Mr Brown’s handling of the recession-hit UK economy. Yet, Britons have seen their living standards suffered in the last couple of years and there can be no scapegoat as convenient as the incumbent government.
As the Daily Express believes only David Cameron can save Britain, telling readers “David Cameron has decisively won the case for change. But he needs a clear mandate. So the Daily Express urges readers to vote Conservative tomorrow. The future of our nation is at stake.”
In fact, out of the 15 most influential newspapers in the UK, two (Guardian and Observer) have shifted from Labour to Lib Dem, only one, the Mirror, is for Labour while advocating tactical voting for Lib Dem. The rest are all for the Conservative Party, including the Financial Times, Times and the Observer, which had not supported the Tories for at least 18 years.
As if it is an European conspiracy, just yesterday, the European Commission warned that the British budget deficit will swell this year to become the biggest in the European Union, overtaking even Greece. The EC’s spring economic forecasts put the UK deficit for this calendar year at 12% of GDP, the highest of all 27 EU nations and worse than the Treasury's own forecasts. It is also likely to help the Conservatives because there are doubts that a hung parliament will have the clout to rapidly reduce the deficit. A hung parliament is when no single party has enough seats to form a majority government on its own.
The Conservatives are likely to win their fight to oust the ruling Labour Party, but it is clear that no one party is likely to have an overall majority. The last time Britain had a hung parliament was in 1974 and that was short-lived because the cabinet could not even agree on how refuse should be collected. What seems obvious, despite all the scare tactics of the last few days is that the old voting system which produced a two-and-a-half party system in British politics will change from today. The smaller Lib Dem has finally arrived, a fate that our own Nkrumaist parties have not been able to achieve since 1992.
The inexperienced, Eton-educated Cameron has managed to give the Tories a new, soft image from the old haughty right-wing image. But, bringing the Tories to the centre has only made it more difficult for the voters to differentiate between the two main parties. In 1997 when Britons voted for change after 18 years under the Tories, there was a clear delineation between left and right, between Conservative and Labour. Now the lines are blurred.
This has forced the Liberals to be more left wing than the social democrats of Labour. The Lib Dems know that their only hope of having a piece of the governing cake is through a coalition.
Paul Stone, the public law expert at DLA Piper argues that a coalition government can lead to laws that are “often watered down to the point of being anodyne as a result of endless rounds of review and compromise”. Ironically, the wife of Nick Clegg (the apostle of coalition) works for DLA Piper.
Nick Clegg said in Durham called out to Britons to come out and vote in their numbers. “It might be a small cross [on the ballot paper] but it will be a big step towards a better, fairer Britain,” he says.
Like Dr Kwesi Nduom in 2008, Nick Clegg’s star shone the brightest in the first debate, with his purported disdain for the “old politics”, and taking easy pot shots at the other two. But, unlike Nduom, Clegg has managed to stay significant in the polls after the debates. Cleggmania had sustainability.
Desperate Brown is did a lot of walking, talking and even smiling with more confidence, shaking more greasy factory hands and carrying more pampers-wearing babies than he thought necessary some weeks ago. This is very different to the earlier campaign, which was all about getting the PM to meet his supporters in controlled environments.
“I know there are people who say, or hope, that the election is already over. But I tell you that tomorrow is the time for the thousands of people to speak for themselves. Tomorrow doesn't belong to the press, to the commentators, to the insiders, to the vested interests or even to the political parties. Tomorrow your voice shall be heard and your vote will determine the direction of this country.” That was Brown yesterday.
But my prediction is that he would be forced to resign on May 7 and with Labour having a new leader, and the conservatives just falling short of a working majority there is every chance for Clegg to be a kingmaker, forming a coalition government with Labour under a new leader. I certainly hope David triumphs and deliver a brighter Britain.
The Daily Telegraph, in backing David Cameron reminds readers that the Conservative is still “Built on the concept that the state should do less, better, and that decisions are best taken as closely as possible to where they impact, it addresses the straitened circumstances of the time...”
The Sunday Telegraph editorial still believes that there is a marked difference between the two main parties: “Despite the parties' attempts to capture the all-important middle ground, the differences between them are clear. Labour believes that only the state can solve the country's economic and social problems. The Conservatives, by contrast, believe that the growth of the central state is the cause of the problem, not its solution, and want to call upon the invigorating power of citizens and communities.”
qanawu.blogspot.com
Thirteen years of Labour Party rule in Britain has taken its toll. The wind of change that blew across the Atlantic from America to Ghana has made a vertical shoot via the Greenwich Meridian to the UK. The campaign slogan of the main opposition party in the UK is “Vote for Change”.
Yet the outcome of the UK general election on May 6 is by no means certain. To use the cover story of the Focus on Africa Magazine in 2008 on the Ghanaian elections, it is ‘Too Close To Call’. About a year ago, today was supposed to be a done deal for the younger Cameron. That the Conservative leader should be going into today's poll with the result far too close to call is a surely a testament to the humiliating deficiencies of his campaign, according to one commentary.
David Cameron, the 43 year-old leader of the Conservative Party, a contemporary of mine in the Young Conservatives (the Tory youth win) during university years, would have had an easier go at getting the needed majority to form the next government, but he has not been able to deal decisively with serious doubts about his experience, capability and substance as a formidable politician.
Until today, out of a total of 646 seats, Labour controlled 345 seats, the Conservative Party 193, Liberal Democrats (Lib Dems) 63. Dr Brown led with a working majority of 56, less 289 of all other parties - excluding Speaker & Deputies and the 5 Sinn Fein MPs who refused to take their seats at Westminster).
Yesterday, YouGov opinion poll left the Conservatives on 35%, the Lib Dems on 24% (down 4) and Labour on 30% (+2). The last two days saw the three candidates doing night shifts all in a bid to win over the floating voters. Of the 116 marginal/swing constituencies, the Conservatives need to win to form an overall majority, 26 are held by Lib Dem and 90 are Labour. Nine of them could go to any of the three parties and 81 are LAB-CON marginals.
It is for this reason that in the last few days, Labour has been calling for tactical voting in favour of Lib Dem in areas that they know Labour can by no means unseat the Tories. They are also calling on Lib Dem sympathisers to give their votes to Labour to keep out the Tories. If this anti-Tory pact works, Labour would end up holding on to 81 seats, while the Lib Dems would hold on to 26 and gain nine.
Tactical voting is defined as a conscious decision by a voter to back a party other than the one they support, in a pragmatic bid to secure a more desirable result in their constituency.
But, Qanawu does not expect a large shift in support from Lib Dem to Labour. Labour has gone stale. Nobody doubts Mr Brown’s handling of the recession-hit UK economy. Yet, Britons have seen their living standards suffered in the last couple of years and there can be no scapegoat as convenient as the incumbent government.
As the Daily Express believes only David Cameron can save Britain, telling readers “David Cameron has decisively won the case for change. But he needs a clear mandate. So the Daily Express urges readers to vote Conservative tomorrow. The future of our nation is at stake.”
In fact, out of the 15 most influential newspapers in the UK, two (Guardian and Observer) have shifted from Labour to Lib Dem, only one, the Mirror, is for Labour while advocating tactical voting for Lib Dem. The rest are all for the Conservative Party, including the Financial Times, Times and the Observer, which had not supported the Tories for at least 18 years.
As if it is an European conspiracy, just yesterday, the European Commission warned that the British budget deficit will swell this year to become the biggest in the European Union, overtaking even Greece. The EC’s spring economic forecasts put the UK deficit for this calendar year at 12% of GDP, the highest of all 27 EU nations and worse than the Treasury's own forecasts. It is also likely to help the Conservatives because there are doubts that a hung parliament will have the clout to rapidly reduce the deficit. A hung parliament is when no single party has enough seats to form a majority government on its own.
The Conservatives are likely to win their fight to oust the ruling Labour Party, but it is clear that no one party is likely to have an overall majority. The last time Britain had a hung parliament was in 1974 and that was short-lived because the cabinet could not even agree on how refuse should be collected. What seems obvious, despite all the scare tactics of the last few days is that the old voting system which produced a two-and-a-half party system in British politics will change from today. The smaller Lib Dem has finally arrived, a fate that our own Nkrumaist parties have not been able to achieve since 1992.
The inexperienced, Eton-educated Cameron has managed to give the Tories a new, soft image from the old haughty right-wing image. But, bringing the Tories to the centre has only made it more difficult for the voters to differentiate between the two main parties. In 1997 when Britons voted for change after 18 years under the Tories, there was a clear delineation between left and right, between Conservative and Labour. Now the lines are blurred.
This has forced the Liberals to be more left wing than the social democrats of Labour. The Lib Dems know that their only hope of having a piece of the governing cake is through a coalition.
Paul Stone, the public law expert at DLA Piper argues that a coalition government can lead to laws that are “often watered down to the point of being anodyne as a result of endless rounds of review and compromise”. Ironically, the wife of Nick Clegg (the apostle of coalition) works for DLA Piper.
Nick Clegg said in Durham called out to Britons to come out and vote in their numbers. “It might be a small cross [on the ballot paper] but it will be a big step towards a better, fairer Britain,” he says.
Like Dr Kwesi Nduom in 2008, Nick Clegg’s star shone the brightest in the first debate, with his purported disdain for the “old politics”, and taking easy pot shots at the other two. But, unlike Nduom, Clegg has managed to stay significant in the polls after the debates. Cleggmania had sustainability.
Desperate Brown is did a lot of walking, talking and even smiling with more confidence, shaking more greasy factory hands and carrying more pampers-wearing babies than he thought necessary some weeks ago. This is very different to the earlier campaign, which was all about getting the PM to meet his supporters in controlled environments.
“I know there are people who say, or hope, that the election is already over. But I tell you that tomorrow is the time for the thousands of people to speak for themselves. Tomorrow doesn't belong to the press, to the commentators, to the insiders, to the vested interests or even to the political parties. Tomorrow your voice shall be heard and your vote will determine the direction of this country.” That was Brown yesterday.
But my prediction is that he would be forced to resign on May 7 and with Labour having a new leader, and the conservatives just falling short of a working majority there is every chance for Clegg to be a kingmaker, forming a coalition government with Labour under a new leader. I certainly hope David triumphs and deliver a brighter Britain.
The Daily Telegraph, in backing David Cameron reminds readers that the Conservative is still “Built on the concept that the state should do less, better, and that decisions are best taken as closely as possible to where they impact, it addresses the straitened circumstances of the time...”
The Sunday Telegraph editorial still believes that there is a marked difference between the two main parties: “Despite the parties' attempts to capture the all-important middle ground, the differences between them are clear. Labour believes that only the state can solve the country's economic and social problems. The Conservatives, by contrast, believe that the growth of the central state is the cause of the problem, not its solution, and want to call upon the invigorating power of citizens and communities.”
qanawu.blogspot.com
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
NPP ASPIRANTS, LEAVE KUFUOR ALONE AND DEFEAT THE BLAME GAME
'Just take a deep breath and exhale slowly,' said a veteran politician in the wake of a presidential defeat. 'Forget about the finger-pointing, and start figuring out the way to a future that makes us relevant not just to our traditional constituency but to independents and independent-thinking NPP and NDC sympathisers.'
This was the opening remarks of an article I wrote on January 10, 2009 with the title ‘NPP MUST DEFEAT THE BLAME GAME’.
But, in the last week alone, there are reports of a New Patriotic Party constituency chairman blaming former President Kufuor for the 2008 electoral defeat and a Regional Organiser redirecting blame towards the 2008 flagbearer. The regional officer effectively blamed Nana Akufo-Addo for ‘engineering’ the prosecution of Kwadwo Mpiani and co over GIA!
This is not healthy for Ghana’s democracy and certainly not for the opposition party. Ghanaians are eager to see the NPP directing its attention on the ruling party and offering alternatives to what the government has to offer.
I have a personal experience on how damaging the blame game can be to a family. Four years ago today, April 6, my cousin and best friend, Ferdinand Ayim died in a road accident. It was a most painful loss! The family was almost torn apart as the blame game started. Witches were blamed; family members were blamed; politicians were blamed; some of us were blamed for discouraging him, through a political calculation, from running for the NPP General Secretary position in 2005. Being the General Secretary, it was simplistically argued, would not have occasioned him travelling on an official government duty about paragliding!
Instructively, the blame game was by and large fed by people who were not members of our family, including pastors and jujumen. They succeeded in knocking our heads together. This blame game almost marred the funeral of a commonly loved one.
But, blamers and accusers alike could understand the pain that was driving the blame game. We were all pained and looking for an escape. However, we chose to manufacture answers in the blame game and risked tearing the family apart. The family of course recovered, but it cost us dearly. Rest in peace my brother!
For the next three months the NPP risks being consumed by the blame game and in a manner that could eat away the unifying anatomy of the Elephant Family. But, there are a lot of positive things happening in the party. There is a revived commitment to work harder and better at the grassroots level. The party’s challenge now is how to get through the next 3 months unscathed.
On Sunday, I witnessed an NPP constituency chairman addressing some party supporters, specifically, in Jerusalem, Kpong Kantamanso. He said, as Vice Chairman in 2008, not once did he come to that area to campaign and that this was not an isolated incident. But, that they are determined to correct the shortcomings of the past and work harder for 2012. The polling station chairman of the area also spelt out plans to create a welfare system and build a closed and caring family of NPP sympathisers in his area.
There are others who are determined to focus on the past to make a case for the future, however. This is not unusual. But, it should be checked. Focusing on whether Alan Kyerematen resigned or not in 2008 is unhelpful and divisive. Let him sell his message and leave it to the over 114,000 delegates to decide. Also, aspirants and their supporters should leave former President Kufuor out of this flagbearership contest. This contest is not about Kufuor. Kufuor played the biggest role in the party’s success and would play a significant role for the party’s future. Just leave him out of anything that seeks to divide the party. Even if he is not neutral the party should resist temptations to drag him into the centre of this campaign. Let those campaigning cry their own proverbial cry.
There are those who use their personal grievances against the former President to throw their weight behind a particular candidate and use that vehicle to settle personal scores. There are others, who believe they can only advance their intra-political cause by seeking factional refuge under Kufuor. They would, with uncontrolled passion, jump into the defence of the former President but in a manner that is divisive only to score a political goal by portraying an internal competitor as anti-Kufuor. There should be greater discipline from all sides.
There is always a legitimate reason in any competition to show why you are better than your competitor, which may invariably call for some comparisons. Yet, the dynamics of internal politics call for some sensitivity in using this tactic, and the reasons are too obvious to articulate but can be summed up as the need to protect and promote post-intra-contest cohesion, trust and unity.
For example, I have heard it said that the NPP did not sell its 8 years achievements well. Well, who can forget what compelled John Mahama to say comparing records was mediocre! Indeed, any scientific analysis of NPP campaign adverts and other message formats will confirm that the ruling party in 2008 spent more campaign time and money telling Ghanaians about Kufuor’s achievements (NHIS, Capitation Grants, School Feeding Programme, Roads, etc) than telling Ghanaians what to expert in the future. Nana Akufo-Addo’s IEA debate also showed how the party had the unique three-prong task of incumbency of promoting achievements, defending government decisions and projecting hope and promise for the future.
As I write, communication strategists are, for example, busily passing on ‘information’ to newspaper editors about their points-scoring interpretation of how the 2008 campaign was badly ran. They are of course free to do so. Some are bent on making this flagbearership campaign a retrospective one of apportioning blame, rather than what the party should do to win back power.
I believe the article I wrote in January 2009 is still relevant today. I reproduce it below with some portions deleted for space or emphasised for effect:
'Just take a deep breath and exhale slowly,' said a veteran politician in the wake of a presidential defeat. 'Forget about the finger-pointing, and start figuring out the way to a future that makes us relevant not just to our traditional constituency but to independents and independent-thinking NPP and NDC sympathisers.'
Nonetheless, the blame game is in full swing. In the wake of the declaration of Prof John Evans Atta Mills as the President of the Republic, Kukrudites are engaging in the 'losing' party's ritualistic exercise of recrimination, re-examination and very little rebuilding. Bang in the middle of this licking and healing of wounds process is The Blame Game. The President, the Presidential Candidate, Campaign Director, National Officers, Regional and Constituency Officers, former presidential aspirants and close aides to Akufo-Addo are all being fingered in what was arguably the most innovative campaign in our political history.
While it may help deal with a 'defeat' that was shocking and was more than avoidable, it risks creating new cracks for a party that can certainly look forward to a Happier 2012 than this New Year.
My bottom-line message for hyperventilating Kukrudites sorting through the wreckage of their declared defeat at the polls is this: the New Patriotic Party should quickly move away from group or individual blame game and focus its attention on re-examining, and causing to reform, systems and structures that paved the way for the sword of office to be snatched away from the Elephant's jaws of victory and fumbled over to the National Democratic Congress.
Regardless of what might have gone on in the past, especially during the presidential primaries, no leading member of the NPP, from President Kufuor through ambitious ones like Alan Kyerematen and Dan Botwe, to constituency chairmen like Nhyiaeso's Jokad, would have wished defeat on the party they love. After all, there is even better protection and comfort in being perceived 'opposition' within a ruling party than being in opposition with your party.
However, when full direct, effective communications are compromised, rumours and presumptions have their own peculiar way of manufacturing their own realities from facts conjured from the fertile but destructive imaginations from characters afflicted with the classic Pull Him Down syndrome of the Ghanaian cultural environment. This is the danger that the NPP faces as it continues to lick its wounds by using scapegoats as a soothing balm.
Within some very serious circles of the party, John Agyekum Kufuor has been accused of doing Nana Addo in. An abominable thought about a man, who sacrificed over 30 years of his political life to the Danquah-Dombo-Busia tradition before being duly elected President of the Republic. Mr Kufuor is a very pained man. Pained by the fact that he could not hand over power to a deserving successor from his own party, Akufo-Addo. Pained by the fact that his personal decision to exercise his choice to back Mr Kyerematen in the 2007 primaries, has allowed his contribution to the 2008 campaign to be reviewed (after the facts) with some suspicion.
On the other hand, some are saying that the campaign team was made up of 'JAK's enemies' and thus no one wanted him to be involved. They have conveniently ignored the intimate and strategic roles played by some notable Kufuor loyalists. JAK, like Nana, you and I, may have people who don't like him but are they to be seen as his enemies?
Instead, names such as Yaw Osafo-Maafo, Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey, Kofi Apraku and Dan Botwe are cited, men who were deemed good enough to be in Kufuor’s cabinet. First of all, the four men were part of the campaign because they had shown their value in previous campaigns and they were among the 17 aspirants, in a campaign that operated on the philosophy of inclusiveness and unity.
For those who say the President was left out of the campaign, they should cross-check the regular weekly meetings Dr Apraku and, almost daily meetings others in the campaign had with Kwadwo Mpiani, President Kufuor's Chief of Staff.
After 8 years in office, facing the electorate in a year that global food and oil prices reached unprecedented heights, this was a year certainly for opposition politics: just refer to high cost of living. Especially, facing an opposition that was ruthlessly sharp in connecting with the vulnerabilities of the poor masses and was not afraid to climb on the ladder of tribalism to occupy a new presidential palace the investment on which it convinced Ghanaians it would rather have seen gone into a poultry farm, the incumbent NPP had its work cut out.
It is always easier after a defeat to say the NPP was not attacking hard enough, not responding to attacks, nuanced responses to difficult questions, etc. Now, people are wondering why the NPP did not make Prof Mills' health an issue or whip up Akan sentiments. Some are even angry that the President did not use the coercive powers of the state to call a state of emergency in the Volta Region or Tain.
I believe posterity would judge the NPP, Akufo-Addo and Kufuor favourably for not allowing the threat of defeat to compromise long-held principles. It was rather the NDC (then an opposition party) which issued threats of 'victory or violence'. The NPP has every reason to be proud of its record of performance both in office and in the polls. And, Kufuor must be praised for handling over power, peacefully.
In rounding-up terms, Nana Akufo-Addo won the endorsement of fifty percent of Ghanaian voters. The NPP is very strong in the legislature, with an exciting leadership that include the experience of Kyei-Mensah and the energy of Ambrose Derry.
For those stuck in the low gear of the blame game, the cheers from the thousands of party rank and file that greeted the arrivals and speeches of Chairman Peter Mac Manu, Nana Akufo-Addo and J A Kufuor, at Saturday's Thanksgiving Service at the Trade Fair Centre, said it all: the grassroots want the blame game to stop and campaign 2012 to begin now.
The party effectively had less than six months to campaign in 2008. The party took a decision to keep the flagbearer out of NPP-held constituencies until parliamentary candidates were chosen in April, May, and June. Nana was campaigning against a man who had been on every NDC presidential ticket since 1996. The first Akufo-Addo billboard came up in June 2008.
Indeed, it was Kwabena Agyepong who came out with the slogan ‘The Best Man for Ghana’, a direct counter to NDC’s ‘Better Man for Ghana.’ The billboard blitz was a claculated strategy to short circuit Nana’s popularity against the much marketed Mills.
The NPP 2008 campaign actually started in earnest in July, after the Kasoa rally. Before that, Akufo-Addo had to form a team that could combine the twin requisites of reconciliation and campaign efficacy.
The campaign had a committee in charge of Security. Its job was to liaise with the necessary organs of state to ensure that what happened in some nine constituencies in the Volta Region - the alleged assault, intimidation and multiple voting - would be under control.
An Identifiable Group Committee was set up, to among other things, listen to the concerns of groups such as fishermen, commercial drivers, teachers, etc., and see how government or the campaign message could address them, without needing to go for a run-off to apologise.
An Electoral Affairs Committee was set up to not only recruit and train polling agents, but also to prevent the use of an anticipated Ways & Means strategy from the other side and to ensure that the integrity of electoral officers was not compromised.
In all, two gospel concerts and four Believe in Ghana concerts were staged in the night, after campaigning hours, as part of the strategy of attracting some significant constituencies to the party. The total number of four BIG concerts took place in Cape Coast, Tamale, Accra and Kumasi, which critics now say dominated the campaign.
I believe some of the fundamental answers to what went wrong in 2008 may be found by taking a reconstructive look at the party's constitution. The focus must be on how party officers and candidates are nominated.
How to ensure logistics and money deployed to party branches do in fact get there. How the party branches can be revitalised to serve more than mere election machines. How the party can begin mapping out plans for a new grassroots movement that will give them a path back to power.
Signs are that the next two years would be economically difficult. Akufo-Addo sounded the alarm bells when he held a press conference on the effects of the global financial crisis on Ghana, which his opponents thought was too pompous (too known). The party must begin putting the Mills government on its toes. No sleep for the populists. Now is their chance to care for the populace.
The December 2008 debacle should not be seen as a repudiation of the NPP. We should rather see it as a period of deep reflection for the average Ghanaian. The country now has four years to assess the gap between populism and performance; between propaganda and delivering an agenda; between NPP and NDC and between Akufo-Addo and Mills.
We shall all be pro-active witnesses on how the Mills government focuses on the concerns of average Ghanaians, many of whom we now know as floating voters. The NDC, after making all the cheap but effective noises in opposition must now show they have compelling answers for the problems they identified as uppermost in the lives of the Ghanaian people.
Winning or losing election is not so much about individuals but by building efficient and reliable structures and systems. For example, a monitoring system that would guarantee that money allocated from the centre gets to the intended recipient. The philosophy behind the monitoring team was good but it had implementation problems. The idea was to bring on board people like Regional Ministers, DCEs and former executives who were seen as having something to contribute to the campaign at that level.
For example, the Ashanti Regional campaign monitoring team included, Albert Kan-Dapaah, (Defence Minister), Yaw Amankwa, Regional Chairman, Emmanuel Owusu Ansah, Regional Minister, Patricia Appiagyei, Kumasi MCE and FF Antoh, former former Regional Chairman.
The NPP has not the luxury to engage in infighting. Their first responsibility is not to advance the egos of any inner group or individual, it is to the people whose interest politicians seek to advance - the people.
In the words of an Australian opposition leader, 'and that really means we have an obligation to, in the, you know, gladiatorial nature of politics in this country to do what we can to ensure that we are in government as soon as possible, given that we are in opposition everywhere. And that in government, we are actually able to produce the best possible role, results, for the people that we are seeking to serve. Calm down -- and start building a bigger tent.'
gabby@danquahinstitute.org
This was the opening remarks of an article I wrote on January 10, 2009 with the title ‘NPP MUST DEFEAT THE BLAME GAME’.
But, in the last week alone, there are reports of a New Patriotic Party constituency chairman blaming former President Kufuor for the 2008 electoral defeat and a Regional Organiser redirecting blame towards the 2008 flagbearer. The regional officer effectively blamed Nana Akufo-Addo for ‘engineering’ the prosecution of Kwadwo Mpiani and co over GIA!
This is not healthy for Ghana’s democracy and certainly not for the opposition party. Ghanaians are eager to see the NPP directing its attention on the ruling party and offering alternatives to what the government has to offer.
I have a personal experience on how damaging the blame game can be to a family. Four years ago today, April 6, my cousin and best friend, Ferdinand Ayim died in a road accident. It was a most painful loss! The family was almost torn apart as the blame game started. Witches were blamed; family members were blamed; politicians were blamed; some of us were blamed for discouraging him, through a political calculation, from running for the NPP General Secretary position in 2005. Being the General Secretary, it was simplistically argued, would not have occasioned him travelling on an official government duty about paragliding!
Instructively, the blame game was by and large fed by people who were not members of our family, including pastors and jujumen. They succeeded in knocking our heads together. This blame game almost marred the funeral of a commonly loved one.
But, blamers and accusers alike could understand the pain that was driving the blame game. We were all pained and looking for an escape. However, we chose to manufacture answers in the blame game and risked tearing the family apart. The family of course recovered, but it cost us dearly. Rest in peace my brother!
For the next three months the NPP risks being consumed by the blame game and in a manner that could eat away the unifying anatomy of the Elephant Family. But, there are a lot of positive things happening in the party. There is a revived commitment to work harder and better at the grassroots level. The party’s challenge now is how to get through the next 3 months unscathed.
On Sunday, I witnessed an NPP constituency chairman addressing some party supporters, specifically, in Jerusalem, Kpong Kantamanso. He said, as Vice Chairman in 2008, not once did he come to that area to campaign and that this was not an isolated incident. But, that they are determined to correct the shortcomings of the past and work harder for 2012. The polling station chairman of the area also spelt out plans to create a welfare system and build a closed and caring family of NPP sympathisers in his area.
There are others who are determined to focus on the past to make a case for the future, however. This is not unusual. But, it should be checked. Focusing on whether Alan Kyerematen resigned or not in 2008 is unhelpful and divisive. Let him sell his message and leave it to the over 114,000 delegates to decide. Also, aspirants and their supporters should leave former President Kufuor out of this flagbearership contest. This contest is not about Kufuor. Kufuor played the biggest role in the party’s success and would play a significant role for the party’s future. Just leave him out of anything that seeks to divide the party. Even if he is not neutral the party should resist temptations to drag him into the centre of this campaign. Let those campaigning cry their own proverbial cry.
There are those who use their personal grievances against the former President to throw their weight behind a particular candidate and use that vehicle to settle personal scores. There are others, who believe they can only advance their intra-political cause by seeking factional refuge under Kufuor. They would, with uncontrolled passion, jump into the defence of the former President but in a manner that is divisive only to score a political goal by portraying an internal competitor as anti-Kufuor. There should be greater discipline from all sides.
There is always a legitimate reason in any competition to show why you are better than your competitor, which may invariably call for some comparisons. Yet, the dynamics of internal politics call for some sensitivity in using this tactic, and the reasons are too obvious to articulate but can be summed up as the need to protect and promote post-intra-contest cohesion, trust and unity.
For example, I have heard it said that the NPP did not sell its 8 years achievements well. Well, who can forget what compelled John Mahama to say comparing records was mediocre! Indeed, any scientific analysis of NPP campaign adverts and other message formats will confirm that the ruling party in 2008 spent more campaign time and money telling Ghanaians about Kufuor’s achievements (NHIS, Capitation Grants, School Feeding Programme, Roads, etc) than telling Ghanaians what to expert in the future. Nana Akufo-Addo’s IEA debate also showed how the party had the unique three-prong task of incumbency of promoting achievements, defending government decisions and projecting hope and promise for the future.
As I write, communication strategists are, for example, busily passing on ‘information’ to newspaper editors about their points-scoring interpretation of how the 2008 campaign was badly ran. They are of course free to do so. Some are bent on making this flagbearership campaign a retrospective one of apportioning blame, rather than what the party should do to win back power.
I believe the article I wrote in January 2009 is still relevant today. I reproduce it below with some portions deleted for space or emphasised for effect:
'Just take a deep breath and exhale slowly,' said a veteran politician in the wake of a presidential defeat. 'Forget about the finger-pointing, and start figuring out the way to a future that makes us relevant not just to our traditional constituency but to independents and independent-thinking NPP and NDC sympathisers.'
Nonetheless, the blame game is in full swing. In the wake of the declaration of Prof John Evans Atta Mills as the President of the Republic, Kukrudites are engaging in the 'losing' party's ritualistic exercise of recrimination, re-examination and very little rebuilding. Bang in the middle of this licking and healing of wounds process is The Blame Game. The President, the Presidential Candidate, Campaign Director, National Officers, Regional and Constituency Officers, former presidential aspirants and close aides to Akufo-Addo are all being fingered in what was arguably the most innovative campaign in our political history.
While it may help deal with a 'defeat' that was shocking and was more than avoidable, it risks creating new cracks for a party that can certainly look forward to a Happier 2012 than this New Year.
My bottom-line message for hyperventilating Kukrudites sorting through the wreckage of their declared defeat at the polls is this: the New Patriotic Party should quickly move away from group or individual blame game and focus its attention on re-examining, and causing to reform, systems and structures that paved the way for the sword of office to be snatched away from the Elephant's jaws of victory and fumbled over to the National Democratic Congress.
Regardless of what might have gone on in the past, especially during the presidential primaries, no leading member of the NPP, from President Kufuor through ambitious ones like Alan Kyerematen and Dan Botwe, to constituency chairmen like Nhyiaeso's Jokad, would have wished defeat on the party they love. After all, there is even better protection and comfort in being perceived 'opposition' within a ruling party than being in opposition with your party.
However, when full direct, effective communications are compromised, rumours and presumptions have their own peculiar way of manufacturing their own realities from facts conjured from the fertile but destructive imaginations from characters afflicted with the classic Pull Him Down syndrome of the Ghanaian cultural environment. This is the danger that the NPP faces as it continues to lick its wounds by using scapegoats as a soothing balm.
Within some very serious circles of the party, John Agyekum Kufuor has been accused of doing Nana Addo in. An abominable thought about a man, who sacrificed over 30 years of his political life to the Danquah-Dombo-Busia tradition before being duly elected President of the Republic. Mr Kufuor is a very pained man. Pained by the fact that he could not hand over power to a deserving successor from his own party, Akufo-Addo. Pained by the fact that his personal decision to exercise his choice to back Mr Kyerematen in the 2007 primaries, has allowed his contribution to the 2008 campaign to be reviewed (after the facts) with some suspicion.
On the other hand, some are saying that the campaign team was made up of 'JAK's enemies' and thus no one wanted him to be involved. They have conveniently ignored the intimate and strategic roles played by some notable Kufuor loyalists. JAK, like Nana, you and I, may have people who don't like him but are they to be seen as his enemies?
Instead, names such as Yaw Osafo-Maafo, Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey, Kofi Apraku and Dan Botwe are cited, men who were deemed good enough to be in Kufuor’s cabinet. First of all, the four men were part of the campaign because they had shown their value in previous campaigns and they were among the 17 aspirants, in a campaign that operated on the philosophy of inclusiveness and unity.
For those who say the President was left out of the campaign, they should cross-check the regular weekly meetings Dr Apraku and, almost daily meetings others in the campaign had with Kwadwo Mpiani, President Kufuor's Chief of Staff.
After 8 years in office, facing the electorate in a year that global food and oil prices reached unprecedented heights, this was a year certainly for opposition politics: just refer to high cost of living. Especially, facing an opposition that was ruthlessly sharp in connecting with the vulnerabilities of the poor masses and was not afraid to climb on the ladder of tribalism to occupy a new presidential palace the investment on which it convinced Ghanaians it would rather have seen gone into a poultry farm, the incumbent NPP had its work cut out.
It is always easier after a defeat to say the NPP was not attacking hard enough, not responding to attacks, nuanced responses to difficult questions, etc. Now, people are wondering why the NPP did not make Prof Mills' health an issue or whip up Akan sentiments. Some are even angry that the President did not use the coercive powers of the state to call a state of emergency in the Volta Region or Tain.
I believe posterity would judge the NPP, Akufo-Addo and Kufuor favourably for not allowing the threat of defeat to compromise long-held principles. It was rather the NDC (then an opposition party) which issued threats of 'victory or violence'. The NPP has every reason to be proud of its record of performance both in office and in the polls. And, Kufuor must be praised for handling over power, peacefully.
In rounding-up terms, Nana Akufo-Addo won the endorsement of fifty percent of Ghanaian voters. The NPP is very strong in the legislature, with an exciting leadership that include the experience of Kyei-Mensah and the energy of Ambrose Derry.
For those stuck in the low gear of the blame game, the cheers from the thousands of party rank and file that greeted the arrivals and speeches of Chairman Peter Mac Manu, Nana Akufo-Addo and J A Kufuor, at Saturday's Thanksgiving Service at the Trade Fair Centre, said it all: the grassroots want the blame game to stop and campaign 2012 to begin now.
The party effectively had less than six months to campaign in 2008. The party took a decision to keep the flagbearer out of NPP-held constituencies until parliamentary candidates were chosen in April, May, and June. Nana was campaigning against a man who had been on every NDC presidential ticket since 1996. The first Akufo-Addo billboard came up in June 2008.
Indeed, it was Kwabena Agyepong who came out with the slogan ‘The Best Man for Ghana’, a direct counter to NDC’s ‘Better Man for Ghana.’ The billboard blitz was a claculated strategy to short circuit Nana’s popularity against the much marketed Mills.
The NPP 2008 campaign actually started in earnest in July, after the Kasoa rally. Before that, Akufo-Addo had to form a team that could combine the twin requisites of reconciliation and campaign efficacy.
The campaign had a committee in charge of Security. Its job was to liaise with the necessary organs of state to ensure that what happened in some nine constituencies in the Volta Region - the alleged assault, intimidation and multiple voting - would be under control.
An Identifiable Group Committee was set up, to among other things, listen to the concerns of groups such as fishermen, commercial drivers, teachers, etc., and see how government or the campaign message could address them, without needing to go for a run-off to apologise.
An Electoral Affairs Committee was set up to not only recruit and train polling agents, but also to prevent the use of an anticipated Ways & Means strategy from the other side and to ensure that the integrity of electoral officers was not compromised.
In all, two gospel concerts and four Believe in Ghana concerts were staged in the night, after campaigning hours, as part of the strategy of attracting some significant constituencies to the party. The total number of four BIG concerts took place in Cape Coast, Tamale, Accra and Kumasi, which critics now say dominated the campaign.
I believe some of the fundamental answers to what went wrong in 2008 may be found by taking a reconstructive look at the party's constitution. The focus must be on how party officers and candidates are nominated.
How to ensure logistics and money deployed to party branches do in fact get there. How the party branches can be revitalised to serve more than mere election machines. How the party can begin mapping out plans for a new grassroots movement that will give them a path back to power.
Signs are that the next two years would be economically difficult. Akufo-Addo sounded the alarm bells when he held a press conference on the effects of the global financial crisis on Ghana, which his opponents thought was too pompous (too known). The party must begin putting the Mills government on its toes. No sleep for the populists. Now is their chance to care for the populace.
The December 2008 debacle should not be seen as a repudiation of the NPP. We should rather see it as a period of deep reflection for the average Ghanaian. The country now has four years to assess the gap between populism and performance; between propaganda and delivering an agenda; between NPP and NDC and between Akufo-Addo and Mills.
We shall all be pro-active witnesses on how the Mills government focuses on the concerns of average Ghanaians, many of whom we now know as floating voters. The NDC, after making all the cheap but effective noises in opposition must now show they have compelling answers for the problems they identified as uppermost in the lives of the Ghanaian people.
Winning or losing election is not so much about individuals but by building efficient and reliable structures and systems. For example, a monitoring system that would guarantee that money allocated from the centre gets to the intended recipient. The philosophy behind the monitoring team was good but it had implementation problems. The idea was to bring on board people like Regional Ministers, DCEs and former executives who were seen as having something to contribute to the campaign at that level.
For example, the Ashanti Regional campaign monitoring team included, Albert Kan-Dapaah, (Defence Minister), Yaw Amankwa, Regional Chairman, Emmanuel Owusu Ansah, Regional Minister, Patricia Appiagyei, Kumasi MCE and FF Antoh, former former Regional Chairman.
The NPP has not the luxury to engage in infighting. Their first responsibility is not to advance the egos of any inner group or individual, it is to the people whose interest politicians seek to advance - the people.
In the words of an Australian opposition leader, 'and that really means we have an obligation to, in the, you know, gladiatorial nature of politics in this country to do what we can to ensure that we are in government as soon as possible, given that we are in opposition everywhere. And that in government, we are actually able to produce the best possible role, results, for the people that we are seeking to serve. Calm down -- and start building a bigger tent.'
gabby@danquahinstitute.org
Saturday, April 3, 2010
A MONTHLY CHRONOLOGY OF MOBOCRACY UNDER PROF MILLS
Qanawu Gabby
In May 2009, Nana Akufo-Addo made a statement that was twisted by his detractors in the ruling party to portray him as rather a bellicose character on the outs and his party belligerent:
“Fellow Ghanaians, Instead of uniting us and fostering peace, the last four months have been spent intimidating innocent citizens and political opponents. We have seen physical attacks on NPP members in several parts of the country, including Agbobloshie, Kumasi, and Tamale.
“In the Tamale incidents of February 17th, violence erupted after discussions on Radio Justice following the seizure of my vehicle by agents of National Security. According to the report of the NPP Committee sent to investigate, which was confirmed by the press, there were arson attacks in Nyihini, Lameshegu, Worizehi, Choggu and Gumbihini.
“All the 27 properties that were attacked belonged to NPP members. Not a single one belonged to an NDC member. In the most outrageous case, Madame Sadia Seidu, a thirty-five year-old Nursing Officer and wife of Mr. Bawa Baako Alhassan, was brutally assaulted after a mob burnt and razed down the family’s 18-room house.
“She was chased by a mob of about a hundred, firing gun shots behind her. She ran 400 yards down the street to the house of an NDC member, where the gang attacked her and inflicted multiple cutlass wounds on her.
“No one has been arrested and charged for the attempted murder of Sadia, even though she identified those who led the mob attack. No attempt has been made by the state to assist the innocent victims, numbering about 800, who had their homes and belongings destroyed.”
After laying this foundation, Nana Akufo-Addo went on to forewarn: “The NPP’s leadership has worked very hard to restrain our supporters from reacting to these acts of intimidation and provocation. I am very concerned that sooner or later, militants on our side convinced that the state cannot or will not protect them, may take measures to protect their interests, themselves and their loved ones. Events will then be out of control, driving all of us towards a point of no return.
All of us, the President, the ruling party, the parties in opposition and civil society must, together, act to make our country peaceful and safe, and thus preserve our democracy for posterity.”
Unknown to Ghanaians, this was the beginnings of a mobocracy that would end up devouring the extended family of the mob, including MCEs, DCEs, Regional Ministers.
The splenetic reaction of the Asantehene, Otumfuo Osei Tutu II to the apparent inaction of the Techiman police to the alleged kidnapping and battery of the Tuobodom Omanhene underlined the emerging culture of mobocracy under Mills.
In 2008, Ghanaians were told the contest was between an ‘Asomdwehene’ (King of Peace) and a firebrand cocaine addict. The false and dirty defamatory propaganda obviously had an impression on some voters and the King of Peace won by the slimmest margin in our history (0.4%). But, the violence and lawlessness started even before the swearing in. In fact, it started when the votes were being counted and collated, with calls to arms to troop to the headquarters of the Electoral Commission.
Since then, on average, there have been six reports a month of major cases of mob action allegedly caused either by NDC activists or by people who, because of their political connections, believed impunity is synonymous to immunity under the umbrella. I have selected just a few monthly examples to illustrate the point:
1. NPP Still Living In Fear (6th January 2009, The Chronicle)
• Supporters of the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP) have been living with fear over the last couple of days, since the declaration of election results in favour of the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) by Dr. Kwadwo Afari Djan’s Electoral Commission, on Saturday. Whilst some have suffered brutalities at the hands of NDC supporters, others have been evicted from their homes by their landlords, for having supported the NPP during the election period. Reports coming in from the regions also confirm similar incidents in which NPP supporters have been subjected to severe beatings, with their properties being vandalized.
2. NDC youth destroy shrine (GNA, 21st Jan. 09)
• Some supporters of the National Democratic Congress Party (NDC) destroy the gods of a fetish priest at Mehame in Asutifi District for allegedly prophesying that Nana Akufo-Addo would win the 2008 presidential election.
3. Actions of NDC Transition Team come under fire (GNA, 28th Jan. 09)
• The Minority in Parliament described the summoning of the Auditor General by NDC transition team as amounting to "utter and contemptuous disregard of the law, intimidation and violation of independent constitutional bodies."
4. Ashaiman NDC supporters besiege assembly, assault Director (GNA, 10th Feb. 09)
• About 30 supporters of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) in Ashaiman besiege the Ashaiman Municipal Assembly (AMA) and attack the Coordinating Director over management of public toilets. The Director, Mr Kwamina Akwa, was assaulted, had his spectacles destroyed and mobile phone snatched. The NDC supporters were returning from the court that heard the case involving the forcible takeover of toilets filed by operators who were managing them during the NPP administration. The Ashaiman police were informed but failed to bring the situation under control.
5. Ga-Dangbe Youth threaten to eject Kufuor (12th March 2009, Myjoyonline)
• The Ga-Dangme Youth Association threatened to demonstrate against the acquisition of an Office at Ridge in Accra by former President J.A. Kufuor.
6. NDC Youth Strike Again (23rd March 2009, Ghanaweb)
• The Nkwanta National Democratic Congress (NDC) youth joined their colleagues in Accra and other parts of the country in the vehicle snatching spree, with the Nkwanta District Coordinator of the Non-formal Education Division (NFED) and other supervisors being their first victims. The youth, numbering about 40 and allegedly led by the NDC Constituency Youth Organizer, Alidu Musah aka Suraj, rushed on the NFED Coordinator during one of her official supervision duties and seized her car, telling her that “you are an NPP activist and now that we are in power, you must handover all government properties in your care”.
7. NDC youth vandalise Party's office (7th April 2009, GNA)
• Youth supporters of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) in the Akwatia Constituency vandalize the Party's offices at Akwatia to protest the nomination of Mr George Agyeman-Duah as Kwaebibirem District Chief Executive (DCE). Singing war songs, the protesters smashed louvre windows and furniture, and burnt files and other stationery.
8. NDC Chairman beats up MP (16th May 2009, Daily Guide)
• The Chairman of the Ashaiman branch of the NDC, Alhaji Issifu Braimahm assaulted the MP for the area, Hon. Alfred Agbesi, for refusing to support their call to seize control over public toilets and lorry parks in the municipality. The Party Chairman delivered a heavy punch to the forehead of the Hon. MP making the Ashaiman legislator bang his head against a wall behind him. The incident took place at an executive meeting of the party at Ashaiman around 4:00 pm on the 14th of May 2009.
9. NDC supporters vandalise radio station (31st May 2009, GNA)
• An irate group of NDC youth, allegedly organized by the Member of Parliament for Techiman South in the Brong Ahafo region, Addai Simon, and led by the Constituency Organizer, Mumuni Saaka, invaded a local radio station, Classic FM, on Thursday May 28, 2009 with cutlasses, knives and sharp implements, stabbing two workers in the process and vandalized the station, leaving behind tales of woes, as the workers ran helter-skelter for dear life. The ‘Kanawu’ programme comes off every Thursday to discuss topical issues in the Techiman Municipality and had picked on a story about Hon. Addai, MP for the area who had allegedly threatened to sack National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) officials in the municipality.
10. NDC thugs seize Tamale NHIS, NYEP office (2nd June 2009, Myjoyonline)
• Thugs suspected to be sympathizers of the ruling National Democratic Congress on Tuesday raided the offices of the National Health Insurance Authority and the National Youth Employment Programme in Tamale, assaulted the workers of the two offices, threw them out and locked the office premises. The Metropolitan health scheme manager at the office, Fuseini Aminu who narrated the ordeal to Joy News said the attackers were supposed to be acting on the orders of their leaders. "We were in the office working, doing our normal work when some group of people came to tell us to leave the office immediately. I asked them what the reason was and from where did they get the authority. They told us they have been asked to come and sack us and that we should do that without complain," he narrated.
11. NDC Thugs Attack NPP Serial Callers (12th June 2009, The Chronicle)
• The Western regional Command of the Ghana Police Service (GPS) has taken over investigations into circumstances that led to a brutal assault on three Serial Callers who have allegiance to the New Patriotic Party (NPP) in Takoradi, by suspected National Democratic Congress (NDC) thugs. The thugs, who assaulted the serial callers, were reported to have been led by one Muhammad Anaba, an NDC activist and Chairman of the Takoradi Butchers Association. The regional Crime Officer, Mr. Vincent C. Agbenyato confirmed in a telephone interview that the said Muhammed Anaba had been arrested and granted bail. Muhammed Anaba reportedly engaged one of the NPP Serial Callers by name Kofi Adu, in a fierce argument which ended on a bitter note, with the latter ordering scores of NDC thugs to assault him.
12. NDC thugs attack NHIS office (18th June 2009, GNA)
• Some youth, believed to be sympathisers of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), are reported to have matched to the NHIS Secretariat in Goaso to push for the removal of the District Scheme Manager. The two were picked up early Thursday after police investigations revealed they led the youth to perpetrate the illegal act. Goaso District Police Commander, Chief Superintendent Kwabena Bediako said the other perpetrators would be pursued and arrested. This is one of several such attacks that supporters of the ruling party have been accused of engaging in since the new administration assumed power.
13. Choice FM under attack (19th June 2009, Daily Guide)
• Choice FM, an Accra based private radio station, has been ordered not to broadcast a political current affairs programme it intends to start airing from this Saturday. The threatening order, which was first sent in the form of a telephone call and a sms text message from a telephone number 0244371682, was reinforced by three men who stormed the station yesterday and introduced themselves to the General Manager, Raymond Afaga-Chie, as National Security agents. The agents, said they had ‘orders from above’ to order the station not to broadcast the program because the promotional advert was injurious to the government in power and the host, Martin Adjei-Mensah, is a known student leader of the opposition NPP.
14. NDC supporters on rampage in Kumasi (26th June 2009, Myjoyonline)
• Disgruntled supporters of the ruling National Democratic Congress, Friday vandalized properties in Kumasi, in protest against the resignation of the Sports Minister, Alhaji Mohammed Muntaka Mubarak. The angry supporters reportedly assaulted a woman and valdalised her urvan bus, accusing her of making derogatory remarks about the former minister who is also MP of Asawase in Kumasi. They argued they did not understand why Alhaji Mubarak has been “forced to resign” after he had been exonerated of all charges of financial malfeasance made against him. The Asawase Constituency Secretary of the NDC, one Salifu, who led the demonstration, told Luv FM’s Elton John Brobbey the demonstrators were outraged by the development.
15. NDC supporters threaten to seize toilets in Cape Coast (19th July 2009, Myjoyonline)
• Supporters of the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC), are continuing to demand the right to control toilet facilities in the country. According to Joy FM’s Central Regional Correspondent, Richard Kojo Nyarko, the angry supporters have given a three-day ultimatum after which if nothing is done they will seize all toilet facilities in the Cape Coast Metropolis. The supporters say although a selection interview was conducted to pick people from amongst them to man the toilet facilities, some machinations were being done to torpedo the process. They warned their patience is thinning.
16. Minority calls for speedy investigations into Agbogboshie killings (27th August 2009, GNA)
• The Minority in Parliament appealed to the Minister of Interior to investigate, arrest and prosecute those who masterminded the killings at Agbogbloshie, Accra. The aggressive assailants reportedly used machetes, axes, iron rods, stones and other crude or lethal weapons to hack two of the victims to death and consequently inflicted degrees of life threatening multiple wounds on others. Hon. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu wondered why some of the people, who allegedly masterminded the killings, were still walking about freely in the streets of Accra and other places with impunity. Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu said the victims at the hospital have allegedly named names such as Sule, Mohammed Ayatu, Sahana, Awal Voulina Naa, Sule Nabiya, Abdallah Rasta and Abdallah whom they said were responsible for the act.
To be continued
qanawu@gmail.com
In May 2009, Nana Akufo-Addo made a statement that was twisted by his detractors in the ruling party to portray him as rather a bellicose character on the outs and his party belligerent:
“Fellow Ghanaians, Instead of uniting us and fostering peace, the last four months have been spent intimidating innocent citizens and political opponents. We have seen physical attacks on NPP members in several parts of the country, including Agbobloshie, Kumasi, and Tamale.
“In the Tamale incidents of February 17th, violence erupted after discussions on Radio Justice following the seizure of my vehicle by agents of National Security. According to the report of the NPP Committee sent to investigate, which was confirmed by the press, there were arson attacks in Nyihini, Lameshegu, Worizehi, Choggu and Gumbihini.
“All the 27 properties that were attacked belonged to NPP members. Not a single one belonged to an NDC member. In the most outrageous case, Madame Sadia Seidu, a thirty-five year-old Nursing Officer and wife of Mr. Bawa Baako Alhassan, was brutally assaulted after a mob burnt and razed down the family’s 18-room house.
“She was chased by a mob of about a hundred, firing gun shots behind her. She ran 400 yards down the street to the house of an NDC member, where the gang attacked her and inflicted multiple cutlass wounds on her.
“No one has been arrested and charged for the attempted murder of Sadia, even though she identified those who led the mob attack. No attempt has been made by the state to assist the innocent victims, numbering about 800, who had their homes and belongings destroyed.”
After laying this foundation, Nana Akufo-Addo went on to forewarn: “The NPP’s leadership has worked very hard to restrain our supporters from reacting to these acts of intimidation and provocation. I am very concerned that sooner or later, militants on our side convinced that the state cannot or will not protect them, may take measures to protect their interests, themselves and their loved ones. Events will then be out of control, driving all of us towards a point of no return.
All of us, the President, the ruling party, the parties in opposition and civil society must, together, act to make our country peaceful and safe, and thus preserve our democracy for posterity.”
Unknown to Ghanaians, this was the beginnings of a mobocracy that would end up devouring the extended family of the mob, including MCEs, DCEs, Regional Ministers.
The splenetic reaction of the Asantehene, Otumfuo Osei Tutu II to the apparent inaction of the Techiman police to the alleged kidnapping and battery of the Tuobodom Omanhene underlined the emerging culture of mobocracy under Mills.
In 2008, Ghanaians were told the contest was between an ‘Asomdwehene’ (King of Peace) and a firebrand cocaine addict. The false and dirty defamatory propaganda obviously had an impression on some voters and the King of Peace won by the slimmest margin in our history (0.4%). But, the violence and lawlessness started even before the swearing in. In fact, it started when the votes were being counted and collated, with calls to arms to troop to the headquarters of the Electoral Commission.
Since then, on average, there have been six reports a month of major cases of mob action allegedly caused either by NDC activists or by people who, because of their political connections, believed impunity is synonymous to immunity under the umbrella. I have selected just a few monthly examples to illustrate the point:
1. NPP Still Living In Fear (6th January 2009, The Chronicle)
• Supporters of the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP) have been living with fear over the last couple of days, since the declaration of election results in favour of the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) by Dr. Kwadwo Afari Djan’s Electoral Commission, on Saturday. Whilst some have suffered brutalities at the hands of NDC supporters, others have been evicted from their homes by their landlords, for having supported the NPP during the election period. Reports coming in from the regions also confirm similar incidents in which NPP supporters have been subjected to severe beatings, with their properties being vandalized.
2. NDC youth destroy shrine (GNA, 21st Jan. 09)
• Some supporters of the National Democratic Congress Party (NDC) destroy the gods of a fetish priest at Mehame in Asutifi District for allegedly prophesying that Nana Akufo-Addo would win the 2008 presidential election.
3. Actions of NDC Transition Team come under fire (GNA, 28th Jan. 09)
• The Minority in Parliament described the summoning of the Auditor General by NDC transition team as amounting to "utter and contemptuous disregard of the law, intimidation and violation of independent constitutional bodies."
4. Ashaiman NDC supporters besiege assembly, assault Director (GNA, 10th Feb. 09)
• About 30 supporters of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) in Ashaiman besiege the Ashaiman Municipal Assembly (AMA) and attack the Coordinating Director over management of public toilets. The Director, Mr Kwamina Akwa, was assaulted, had his spectacles destroyed and mobile phone snatched. The NDC supporters were returning from the court that heard the case involving the forcible takeover of toilets filed by operators who were managing them during the NPP administration. The Ashaiman police were informed but failed to bring the situation under control.
5. Ga-Dangbe Youth threaten to eject Kufuor (12th March 2009, Myjoyonline)
• The Ga-Dangme Youth Association threatened to demonstrate against the acquisition of an Office at Ridge in Accra by former President J.A. Kufuor.
6. NDC Youth Strike Again (23rd March 2009, Ghanaweb)
• The Nkwanta National Democratic Congress (NDC) youth joined their colleagues in Accra and other parts of the country in the vehicle snatching spree, with the Nkwanta District Coordinator of the Non-formal Education Division (NFED) and other supervisors being their first victims. The youth, numbering about 40 and allegedly led by the NDC Constituency Youth Organizer, Alidu Musah aka Suraj, rushed on the NFED Coordinator during one of her official supervision duties and seized her car, telling her that “you are an NPP activist and now that we are in power, you must handover all government properties in your care”.
7. NDC youth vandalise Party's office (7th April 2009, GNA)
• Youth supporters of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) in the Akwatia Constituency vandalize the Party's offices at Akwatia to protest the nomination of Mr George Agyeman-Duah as Kwaebibirem District Chief Executive (DCE). Singing war songs, the protesters smashed louvre windows and furniture, and burnt files and other stationery.
8. NDC Chairman beats up MP (16th May 2009, Daily Guide)
• The Chairman of the Ashaiman branch of the NDC, Alhaji Issifu Braimahm assaulted the MP for the area, Hon. Alfred Agbesi, for refusing to support their call to seize control over public toilets and lorry parks in the municipality. The Party Chairman delivered a heavy punch to the forehead of the Hon. MP making the Ashaiman legislator bang his head against a wall behind him. The incident took place at an executive meeting of the party at Ashaiman around 4:00 pm on the 14th of May 2009.
9. NDC supporters vandalise radio station (31st May 2009, GNA)
• An irate group of NDC youth, allegedly organized by the Member of Parliament for Techiman South in the Brong Ahafo region, Addai Simon, and led by the Constituency Organizer, Mumuni Saaka, invaded a local radio station, Classic FM, on Thursday May 28, 2009 with cutlasses, knives and sharp implements, stabbing two workers in the process and vandalized the station, leaving behind tales of woes, as the workers ran helter-skelter for dear life. The ‘Kanawu’ programme comes off every Thursday to discuss topical issues in the Techiman Municipality and had picked on a story about Hon. Addai, MP for the area who had allegedly threatened to sack National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) officials in the municipality.
10. NDC thugs seize Tamale NHIS, NYEP office (2nd June 2009, Myjoyonline)
• Thugs suspected to be sympathizers of the ruling National Democratic Congress on Tuesday raided the offices of the National Health Insurance Authority and the National Youth Employment Programme in Tamale, assaulted the workers of the two offices, threw them out and locked the office premises. The Metropolitan health scheme manager at the office, Fuseini Aminu who narrated the ordeal to Joy News said the attackers were supposed to be acting on the orders of their leaders. "We were in the office working, doing our normal work when some group of people came to tell us to leave the office immediately. I asked them what the reason was and from where did they get the authority. They told us they have been asked to come and sack us and that we should do that without complain," he narrated.
11. NDC Thugs Attack NPP Serial Callers (12th June 2009, The Chronicle)
• The Western regional Command of the Ghana Police Service (GPS) has taken over investigations into circumstances that led to a brutal assault on three Serial Callers who have allegiance to the New Patriotic Party (NPP) in Takoradi, by suspected National Democratic Congress (NDC) thugs. The thugs, who assaulted the serial callers, were reported to have been led by one Muhammad Anaba, an NDC activist and Chairman of the Takoradi Butchers Association. The regional Crime Officer, Mr. Vincent C. Agbenyato confirmed in a telephone interview that the said Muhammed Anaba had been arrested and granted bail. Muhammed Anaba reportedly engaged one of the NPP Serial Callers by name Kofi Adu, in a fierce argument which ended on a bitter note, with the latter ordering scores of NDC thugs to assault him.
12. NDC thugs attack NHIS office (18th June 2009, GNA)
• Some youth, believed to be sympathisers of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), are reported to have matched to the NHIS Secretariat in Goaso to push for the removal of the District Scheme Manager. The two were picked up early Thursday after police investigations revealed they led the youth to perpetrate the illegal act. Goaso District Police Commander, Chief Superintendent Kwabena Bediako said the other perpetrators would be pursued and arrested. This is one of several such attacks that supporters of the ruling party have been accused of engaging in since the new administration assumed power.
13. Choice FM under attack (19th June 2009, Daily Guide)
• Choice FM, an Accra based private radio station, has been ordered not to broadcast a political current affairs programme it intends to start airing from this Saturday. The threatening order, which was first sent in the form of a telephone call and a sms text message from a telephone number 0244371682, was reinforced by three men who stormed the station yesterday and introduced themselves to the General Manager, Raymond Afaga-Chie, as National Security agents. The agents, said they had ‘orders from above’ to order the station not to broadcast the program because the promotional advert was injurious to the government in power and the host, Martin Adjei-Mensah, is a known student leader of the opposition NPP.
14. NDC supporters on rampage in Kumasi (26th June 2009, Myjoyonline)
• Disgruntled supporters of the ruling National Democratic Congress, Friday vandalized properties in Kumasi, in protest against the resignation of the Sports Minister, Alhaji Mohammed Muntaka Mubarak. The angry supporters reportedly assaulted a woman and valdalised her urvan bus, accusing her of making derogatory remarks about the former minister who is also MP of Asawase in Kumasi. They argued they did not understand why Alhaji Mubarak has been “forced to resign” after he had been exonerated of all charges of financial malfeasance made against him. The Asawase Constituency Secretary of the NDC, one Salifu, who led the demonstration, told Luv FM’s Elton John Brobbey the demonstrators were outraged by the development.
15. NDC supporters threaten to seize toilets in Cape Coast (19th July 2009, Myjoyonline)
• Supporters of the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC), are continuing to demand the right to control toilet facilities in the country. According to Joy FM’s Central Regional Correspondent, Richard Kojo Nyarko, the angry supporters have given a three-day ultimatum after which if nothing is done they will seize all toilet facilities in the Cape Coast Metropolis. The supporters say although a selection interview was conducted to pick people from amongst them to man the toilet facilities, some machinations were being done to torpedo the process. They warned their patience is thinning.
16. Minority calls for speedy investigations into Agbogboshie killings (27th August 2009, GNA)
• The Minority in Parliament appealed to the Minister of Interior to investigate, arrest and prosecute those who masterminded the killings at Agbogbloshie, Accra. The aggressive assailants reportedly used machetes, axes, iron rods, stones and other crude or lethal weapons to hack two of the victims to death and consequently inflicted degrees of life threatening multiple wounds on others. Hon. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu wondered why some of the people, who allegedly masterminded the killings, were still walking about freely in the streets of Accra and other places with impunity. Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu said the victims at the hospital have allegedly named names such as Sule, Mohammed Ayatu, Sahana, Awal Voulina Naa, Sule Nabiya, Abdallah Rasta and Abdallah whom they said were responsible for the act.
To be continued
qanawu@gmail.com
Monday, March 29, 2010
No Ambiguity in NPP Constitution On Election Of Flagbearer
Written by Asare Otchere-Darko Monday, 29 March 2010 18:25
PDF Print E-mail
Some highly respected members of the New Patriotic Party have been arguing that the national leadership of the party, in choosing a date for the election of the 2012 presidential candidate of the party, must stick to the letter of the party’s constitution. This is a responsible statement, ordinarily.
However, their interpretation of the constitution is that the flagbearer must be chosen in (rather than by) December 2010. Some also argue, with some ostensible generosity, that the National Congress to elect the presidential candidate can be done ‘earlier’ but certainly not earlier than September 2010 because of the time the constitution provides for nominations to be filed.
The fundamental canon of interpretation is that where the words of a statute have a plain and straightforward meaning and the words are reasonably capable of only one meaning that one literal meaning must be given. Thus, if a constitution’s language is plain and clear, the duty of interpretation does not arise, and the rules which are to aid doubtful meanings need no discussion.
Chapter 12, Clause 1 of the NPP constitution reads as follows:
1. The election of the Party’s Presidential Candidate shall be held not later than twenty-four (24) months from the date of the national election. The date and venue for the election shall be decided by the National Council, provided, however, that the National Council may, on appropriate occasion, vary the date.
What this means simply is that the only major check on the party, in concluding on a date, is to choose the next flagbearer before December 7, 2010. In theory, it could have been done last year. In practice, it must be done anytime this year before December 7.
It is therefore up to the National Council, which incidentally meets this Wednesday, to take a decision on the date for holding the National Congress. That date should only take two things into consideration: one, allowing for reasonable period of time for people to file their applications for nomination and for candidates to campaign. Two, when would it be practicable to hold a National Congress of some 114,200 delegates with its attendant cost to the party and how that would be funded?
This is because Clause 2 of the same Chapter 12 of the NPP constitution also imposes another time requirement. It reads:
2. Not later than six (6) months prior to the holding of the election, the General Secretary shall give notice inviting applications from Members for nomination as the Party’s candidate to contest for the office of the President of the Republic. The Notice shall be displayed in a conspicuous place in the Party’s Constituency, Regional and National Offices and shall specify the closing date for application, which shall not be more than five (5) months to the holding of the election.
This Clause has been curiously interpreted to mean that notice should be given 6 months before the holding of the election to choose a presidential candidate. But the literal meaning of Chapter 12 Clause 2 is that notice inviting applications or notice to open the filing of nominations should not be longer than 6 months.
It goes on to say that the closing date for nominations should not be longer than 5 months. The operative time frame here is one month. This means that the period for application of nomination should not exceed one month.
There is also another constitutional consideration. Chapter 12, Clause 5(a) of the NPP constitution states that “Where there are more than five contestants for nomination as the Party’s Presidential Candidate, a Special Electoral College shall cast their votes by secret ballot for the first five contestants to be short-listed.”
By some calculations, the Special Electoral College (SEC) should consist of not more than 588 delegates. They comprise of members of the National Council, the National Executive Committee, the Regional Executive Committees (160), the National Council of Elders (15), Members of Parliament (107), three representatives of each of special organs of the Party, past National Officers, 3 representatives each from every external branch (30), Founding Members during the registration of the Party at the Electoral Commission and all New Patriotic Party card bearing Ministers when the Party is in government.
Thus, whichever date is given could be affected by the number of people who opt to file in the period available for the filing of nominations. Yet, this need not arise if the SEC conference is held one day after nominations closed. The date for Congress need not be disturbed by the possibility of a conference of a Special Electoral College.
The root of the constitutional provision which seems to limit the period for applications to one month could be traced to 1992. One could even look at the 1998 Congress, the last Congress when the party was in opposition. The National Council decided to hold that crucial Congress in October 1998, two months after the new national officers, under Chairman Odoi Sykes, were elected. Thus, the candidates had only two months to campaign officially – a period which arguably contained and controlled a campaign that was feared to cause the party some irreparable harm.
This understanding is further underlined under Clause 3 (b), (c) of the same Chapter 12 which deals with nominations when the party is in government.
3 (b) When the Party is in government, the election of a Presidential Candidate shall be held not later than 11 months before the national general election.
It goes on to say that in that 11 month window, notice for applications shall be strictly 3 months, with nominations closing after the first month. It reads:
c) Notice inviting application for the members for nomination as the Party’s candidate shall be given three (3) months prior to the holding of the National Congress and shall close after two (2)months.
Here, aware of the shorter window that the constitution provides for the presidential nomination when the party is in power, it gives a clear unambiguous specific period of 3 months from the opening of nominations to the casting of ballots. Moreover, what is constant here and consistent with Chapter 12 (2) is the one month period it provides for applications to be opened.
This can be construed to mean that whichever date is chosen by the National Council it should give one month for the filing of nominations and an additional period for campaigning. Going by 2007, that additional period could be two months; going by 1998, that additional period should be at least one month.
To show that the relevant provisions under Clause 3 are dealing specifically with the period that the party is in office, Clause 3(d) stipulates:
d) Any Minister, National Officer, and District Chief Executive (DCE) who files to contest to become a Presidential Candidate of the Party shall resign his/her position
In interpreting the party’s constitution, the National Council should always turn to one cardinal canon before all others. It must presume that the framers of the constitution say in the constitution what it means and mean in the constitution what it says there.
As reasoned in Muller v. BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc., 923 P.2d 783, 787-88 (Alaska 1996), "In assessing statutory language, unless words have acquired a peculiar meaning, by virtue of statutory definition or judicial construction, they are to be construed in accordance with their common usage."
There is no ambiguity in the NPP constitution as to when the National Council may decide to hold a National Congress. There may be practical and sectional-interest driven reasons why some may want it sooner and others later. But, let them not seek to advance that sectional cause by importing into the constitution words and meanings that are not there.
The author is the Executive Director of the Danquah Institute, an ideological think tank based in Accra. gabby@danquahinstitute.org
PDF Print E-mail
Some highly respected members of the New Patriotic Party have been arguing that the national leadership of the party, in choosing a date for the election of the 2012 presidential candidate of the party, must stick to the letter of the party’s constitution. This is a responsible statement, ordinarily.
However, their interpretation of the constitution is that the flagbearer must be chosen in (rather than by) December 2010. Some also argue, with some ostensible generosity, that the National Congress to elect the presidential candidate can be done ‘earlier’ but certainly not earlier than September 2010 because of the time the constitution provides for nominations to be filed.
The fundamental canon of interpretation is that where the words of a statute have a plain and straightforward meaning and the words are reasonably capable of only one meaning that one literal meaning must be given. Thus, if a constitution’s language is plain and clear, the duty of interpretation does not arise, and the rules which are to aid doubtful meanings need no discussion.
Chapter 12, Clause 1 of the NPP constitution reads as follows:
1. The election of the Party’s Presidential Candidate shall be held not later than twenty-four (24) months from the date of the national election. The date and venue for the election shall be decided by the National Council, provided, however, that the National Council may, on appropriate occasion, vary the date.
What this means simply is that the only major check on the party, in concluding on a date, is to choose the next flagbearer before December 7, 2010. In theory, it could have been done last year. In practice, it must be done anytime this year before December 7.
It is therefore up to the National Council, which incidentally meets this Wednesday, to take a decision on the date for holding the National Congress. That date should only take two things into consideration: one, allowing for reasonable period of time for people to file their applications for nomination and for candidates to campaign. Two, when would it be practicable to hold a National Congress of some 114,200 delegates with its attendant cost to the party and how that would be funded?
This is because Clause 2 of the same Chapter 12 of the NPP constitution also imposes another time requirement. It reads:
2. Not later than six (6) months prior to the holding of the election, the General Secretary shall give notice inviting applications from Members for nomination as the Party’s candidate to contest for the office of the President of the Republic. The Notice shall be displayed in a conspicuous place in the Party’s Constituency, Regional and National Offices and shall specify the closing date for application, which shall not be more than five (5) months to the holding of the election.
This Clause has been curiously interpreted to mean that notice should be given 6 months before the holding of the election to choose a presidential candidate. But the literal meaning of Chapter 12 Clause 2 is that notice inviting applications or notice to open the filing of nominations should not be longer than 6 months.
It goes on to say that the closing date for nominations should not be longer than 5 months. The operative time frame here is one month. This means that the period for application of nomination should not exceed one month.
There is also another constitutional consideration. Chapter 12, Clause 5(a) of the NPP constitution states that “Where there are more than five contestants for nomination as the Party’s Presidential Candidate, a Special Electoral College shall cast their votes by secret ballot for the first five contestants to be short-listed.”
By some calculations, the Special Electoral College (SEC) should consist of not more than 588 delegates. They comprise of members of the National Council, the National Executive Committee, the Regional Executive Committees (160), the National Council of Elders (15), Members of Parliament (107), three representatives of each of special organs of the Party, past National Officers, 3 representatives each from every external branch (30), Founding Members during the registration of the Party at the Electoral Commission and all New Patriotic Party card bearing Ministers when the Party is in government.
Thus, whichever date is given could be affected by the number of people who opt to file in the period available for the filing of nominations. Yet, this need not arise if the SEC conference is held one day after nominations closed. The date for Congress need not be disturbed by the possibility of a conference of a Special Electoral College.
The root of the constitutional provision which seems to limit the period for applications to one month could be traced to 1992. One could even look at the 1998 Congress, the last Congress when the party was in opposition. The National Council decided to hold that crucial Congress in October 1998, two months after the new national officers, under Chairman Odoi Sykes, were elected. Thus, the candidates had only two months to campaign officially – a period which arguably contained and controlled a campaign that was feared to cause the party some irreparable harm.
This understanding is further underlined under Clause 3 (b), (c) of the same Chapter 12 which deals with nominations when the party is in government.
3 (b) When the Party is in government, the election of a Presidential Candidate shall be held not later than 11 months before the national general election.
It goes on to say that in that 11 month window, notice for applications shall be strictly 3 months, with nominations closing after the first month. It reads:
c) Notice inviting application for the members for nomination as the Party’s candidate shall be given three (3) months prior to the holding of the National Congress and shall close after two (2)months.
Here, aware of the shorter window that the constitution provides for the presidential nomination when the party is in power, it gives a clear unambiguous specific period of 3 months from the opening of nominations to the casting of ballots. Moreover, what is constant here and consistent with Chapter 12 (2) is the one month period it provides for applications to be opened.
This can be construed to mean that whichever date is chosen by the National Council it should give one month for the filing of nominations and an additional period for campaigning. Going by 2007, that additional period could be two months; going by 1998, that additional period should be at least one month.
To show that the relevant provisions under Clause 3 are dealing specifically with the period that the party is in office, Clause 3(d) stipulates:
d) Any Minister, National Officer, and District Chief Executive (DCE) who files to contest to become a Presidential Candidate of the Party shall resign his/her position
In interpreting the party’s constitution, the National Council should always turn to one cardinal canon before all others. It must presume that the framers of the constitution say in the constitution what it means and mean in the constitution what it says there.
As reasoned in Muller v. BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc., 923 P.2d 783, 787-88 (Alaska 1996), "In assessing statutory language, unless words have acquired a peculiar meaning, by virtue of statutory definition or judicial construction, they are to be construed in accordance with their common usage."
There is no ambiguity in the NPP constitution as to when the National Council may decide to hold a National Congress. There may be practical and sectional-interest driven reasons why some may want it sooner and others later. But, let them not seek to advance that sectional cause by importing into the constitution words and meanings that are not there.
The author is the Executive Director of the Danquah Institute, an ideological think tank based in Accra. gabby@danquahinstitute.org
No Ambiguity in NPP Constitution On Election Of Flagbearer
Written by Asare Otchere-Darko Monday, 29 March 2010 18:25
PDF Print E-mail
Some highly respected members of the New Patriotic Party have been arguing that the national leadership of the party, in choosing a date for the election of the 2012 presidential candidate of the party, must stick to the letter of the party’s constitution. This is a responsible statement, ordinarily.
However, their interpretation of the constitution is that the flagbearer must be chosen in (rather than by) December 2010. Some also argue, with some ostensible generosity, that the National Congress to elect the presidential candidate can be done ‘earlier’ but certainly not earlier than September 2010 because of the time the constitution provides for nominations to be filed.
The fundamental canon of interpretation is that where the words of a statute have a plain and straightforward meaning and the words are reasonably capable of only one meaning that one literal meaning must be given. Thus, if a constitution’s language is plain and clear, the duty of interpretation does not arise, and the rules which are to aid doubtful meanings need no discussion.
Chapter 12, Clause 1 of the NPP constitution reads as follows:
1. The election of the Party’s Presidential Candidate shall be held not later than twenty-four (24) months from the date of the national election. The date and venue for the election shall be decided by the National Council, provided, however, that the National Council may, on appropriate occasion, vary the date.
What this means simply is that the only major check on the party, in concluding on a date, is to choose the next flagbearer before December 7, 2010. In theory, it could have been done last year. In practice, it must be done anytime this year before December 7.
It is therefore up to the National Council, which incidentally meets this Wednesday, to take a decision on the date for holding the National Congress. That date should only take two things into consideration: one, allowing for reasonable period of time for people to file their applications for nomination and for candidates to campaign. Two, when would it be practicable to hold a National Congress of some 114,200 delegates with its attendant cost to the party and how that would be funded?
This is because Clause 2 of the same Chapter 12 of the NPP constitution also imposes another time requirement. It reads:
2. Not later than six (6) months prior to the holding of the election, the General Secretary shall give notice inviting applications from Members for nomination as the Party’s candidate to contest for the office of the President of the Republic. The Notice shall be displayed in a conspicuous place in the Party’s Constituency, Regional and National Offices and shall specify the closing date for application, which shall not be more than five (5) months to the holding of the election.
This Clause has been curiously interpreted to mean that notice should be given 6 months before the holding of the election to choose a presidential candidate. But the literal meaning of Chapter 12 Clause 2 is that notice inviting applications or notice to open the filing of nominations should not be longer than 6 months.
It goes on to say that the closing date for nominations should not be longer than 5 months. The operative time frame here is one month. This means that the period for application of nomination should not exceed one month.
There is also another constitutional consideration. Chapter 12, Clause 5(a) of the NPP constitution states that “Where there are more than five contestants for nomination as the Party’s Presidential Candidate, a Special Electoral College shall cast their votes by secret ballot for the first five contestants to be short-listed.”
By some calculations, the Special Electoral College (SEC) should consist of not more than 588 delegates. They comprise of members of the National Council, the National Executive Committee, the Regional Executive Committees (160), the National Council of Elders (15), Members of Parliament (107), three representatives of each of special organs of the Party, past National Officers, 3 representatives each from every external branch (30), Founding Members during the registration of the Party at the Electoral Commission and all New Patriotic Party card bearing Ministers when the Party is in government.
Thus, whichever date is given could be affected by the number of people who opt to file in the period available for the filing of nominations. Yet, this need not arise if the SEC conference is held one day after nominations closed. The date for Congress need not be disturbed by the possibility of a conference of a Special Electoral College.
The root of the constitutional provision which seems to limit the period for applications to one month could be traced to 1992. One could even look at the 1998 Congress, the last Congress when the party was in opposition. The National Council decided to hold that crucial Congress in October 1998, two months after the new national officers, under Chairman Odoi Sykes, were elected. Thus, the candidates had only two months to campaign officially – a period which arguably contained and controlled a campaign that was feared to cause the party some irreparable harm.
This understanding is further underlined under Clause 3 (b), (c) of the same Chapter 12 which deals with nominations when the party is in government.
3 (b) When the Party is in government, the election of a Presidential Candidate shall be held not later than 11 months before the national general election.
It goes on to say that in that 11 month window, notice for applications shall be strictly 3 months, with nominations closing after the first month. It reads:
c) Notice inviting application for the members for nomination as the Party’s candidate shall be given three (3) months prior to the holding of the National Congress and shall close after two (2)months.
Here, aware of the shorter window that the constitution provides for the presidential nomination when the party is in power, it gives a clear unambiguous specific period of 3 months from the opening of nominations to the casting of ballots. Moreover, what is constant here and consistent with Chapter 12 (2) is the one month period it provides for applications to be opened.
This can be construed to mean that whichever date is chosen by the National Council it should give one month for the filing of nominations and an additional period for campaigning. Going by 2007, that additional period could be two months; going by 1998, that additional period should be at least one month.
To show that the relevant provisions under Clause 3 are dealing specifically with the period that the party is in office, Clause 3(d) stipulates:
d) Any Minister, National Officer, and District Chief Executive (DCE) who files to contest to become a Presidential Candidate of the Party shall resign his/her position
In interpreting the party’s constitution, the National Council should always turn to one cardinal canon before all others. It must presume that the framers of the constitution say in the constitution what it means and mean in the constitution what it says there.
As reasoned in Muller v. BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc., 923 P.2d 783, 787-88 (Alaska 1996), "In assessing statutory language, unless words have acquired a peculiar meaning, by virtue of statutory definition or judicial construction, they are to be construed in accordance with their common usage."
There is no ambiguity in the NPP constitution as to when the National Council may decide to hold a National Congress. There may be practical and sectional-interest driven reasons why some may want it sooner and others later. But, let them not seek to advance that sectional cause by importing into the constitution words and meanings that are not there.
The author is the Executive Director of the Danquah Institute, an ideological think tank based in Accra. gabby@danquahinstitute.org
PDF Print E-mail
Some highly respected members of the New Patriotic Party have been arguing that the national leadership of the party, in choosing a date for the election of the 2012 presidential candidate of the party, must stick to the letter of the party’s constitution. This is a responsible statement, ordinarily.
However, their interpretation of the constitution is that the flagbearer must be chosen in (rather than by) December 2010. Some also argue, with some ostensible generosity, that the National Congress to elect the presidential candidate can be done ‘earlier’ but certainly not earlier than September 2010 because of the time the constitution provides for nominations to be filed.
The fundamental canon of interpretation is that where the words of a statute have a plain and straightforward meaning and the words are reasonably capable of only one meaning that one literal meaning must be given. Thus, if a constitution’s language is plain and clear, the duty of interpretation does not arise, and the rules which are to aid doubtful meanings need no discussion.
Chapter 12, Clause 1 of the NPP constitution reads as follows:
1. The election of the Party’s Presidential Candidate shall be held not later than twenty-four (24) months from the date of the national election. The date and venue for the election shall be decided by the National Council, provided, however, that the National Council may, on appropriate occasion, vary the date.
What this means simply is that the only major check on the party, in concluding on a date, is to choose the next flagbearer before December 7, 2010. In theory, it could have been done last year. In practice, it must be done anytime this year before December 7.
It is therefore up to the National Council, which incidentally meets this Wednesday, to take a decision on the date for holding the National Congress. That date should only take two things into consideration: one, allowing for reasonable period of time for people to file their applications for nomination and for candidates to campaign. Two, when would it be practicable to hold a National Congress of some 114,200 delegates with its attendant cost to the party and how that would be funded?
This is because Clause 2 of the same Chapter 12 of the NPP constitution also imposes another time requirement. It reads:
2. Not later than six (6) months prior to the holding of the election, the General Secretary shall give notice inviting applications from Members for nomination as the Party’s candidate to contest for the office of the President of the Republic. The Notice shall be displayed in a conspicuous place in the Party’s Constituency, Regional and National Offices and shall specify the closing date for application, which shall not be more than five (5) months to the holding of the election.
This Clause has been curiously interpreted to mean that notice should be given 6 months before the holding of the election to choose a presidential candidate. But the literal meaning of Chapter 12 Clause 2 is that notice inviting applications or notice to open the filing of nominations should not be longer than 6 months.
It goes on to say that the closing date for nominations should not be longer than 5 months. The operative time frame here is one month. This means that the period for application of nomination should not exceed one month.
There is also another constitutional consideration. Chapter 12, Clause 5(a) of the NPP constitution states that “Where there are more than five contestants for nomination as the Party’s Presidential Candidate, a Special Electoral College shall cast their votes by secret ballot for the first five contestants to be short-listed.”
By some calculations, the Special Electoral College (SEC) should consist of not more than 588 delegates. They comprise of members of the National Council, the National Executive Committee, the Regional Executive Committees (160), the National Council of Elders (15), Members of Parliament (107), three representatives of each of special organs of the Party, past National Officers, 3 representatives each from every external branch (30), Founding Members during the registration of the Party at the Electoral Commission and all New Patriotic Party card bearing Ministers when the Party is in government.
Thus, whichever date is given could be affected by the number of people who opt to file in the period available for the filing of nominations. Yet, this need not arise if the SEC conference is held one day after nominations closed. The date for Congress need not be disturbed by the possibility of a conference of a Special Electoral College.
The root of the constitutional provision which seems to limit the period for applications to one month could be traced to 1992. One could even look at the 1998 Congress, the last Congress when the party was in opposition. The National Council decided to hold that crucial Congress in October 1998, two months after the new national officers, under Chairman Odoi Sykes, were elected. Thus, the candidates had only two months to campaign officially – a period which arguably contained and controlled a campaign that was feared to cause the party some irreparable harm.
This understanding is further underlined under Clause 3 (b), (c) of the same Chapter 12 which deals with nominations when the party is in government.
3 (b) When the Party is in government, the election of a Presidential Candidate shall be held not later than 11 months before the national general election.
It goes on to say that in that 11 month window, notice for applications shall be strictly 3 months, with nominations closing after the first month. It reads:
c) Notice inviting application for the members for nomination as the Party’s candidate shall be given three (3) months prior to the holding of the National Congress and shall close after two (2)months.
Here, aware of the shorter window that the constitution provides for the presidential nomination when the party is in power, it gives a clear unambiguous specific period of 3 months from the opening of nominations to the casting of ballots. Moreover, what is constant here and consistent with Chapter 12 (2) is the one month period it provides for applications to be opened.
This can be construed to mean that whichever date is chosen by the National Council it should give one month for the filing of nominations and an additional period for campaigning. Going by 2007, that additional period could be two months; going by 1998, that additional period should be at least one month.
To show that the relevant provisions under Clause 3 are dealing specifically with the period that the party is in office, Clause 3(d) stipulates:
d) Any Minister, National Officer, and District Chief Executive (DCE) who files to contest to become a Presidential Candidate of the Party shall resign his/her position
In interpreting the party’s constitution, the National Council should always turn to one cardinal canon before all others. It must presume that the framers of the constitution say in the constitution what it means and mean in the constitution what it says there.
As reasoned in Muller v. BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc., 923 P.2d 783, 787-88 (Alaska 1996), "In assessing statutory language, unless words have acquired a peculiar meaning, by virtue of statutory definition or judicial construction, they are to be construed in accordance with their common usage."
There is no ambiguity in the NPP constitution as to when the National Council may decide to hold a National Congress. There may be practical and sectional-interest driven reasons why some may want it sooner and others later. But, let them not seek to advance that sectional cause by importing into the constitution words and meanings that are not there.
The author is the Executive Director of the Danquah Institute, an ideological think tank based in Accra. gabby@danquahinstitute.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
