A constitution after my own heart

If you haven’t read the report of the Professor H. Kwesi Prempeh's Constitution Review Committee, you are missing something: hope that change will come.

The committee says what 98% of Ghanaians have been saying since 1992, particularly the “repeated party turnover in government without corresponding change in the quality or outcomes of governance”.

In a word, Ghanaians have been disappointed; so disappointed that the committee has no apologies calling our governance system, “choiceless democracy”; in other words, between the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and National Democratic Congress (NDC), there is nothing to choose from.

It is, at best, a choice between toothache and heartache.

I do not disagree with the committee’s emphasis on proffering solutions aimed at “recalibrating our constitutional framework to make it a more effective instrument for national development”. But that is not the conclusion that gives me happiness.

It is in its goal to clip the wings of power that I find a future constitution after my own heart. 

The 127-page report offers an alternative definition of democracy, one with the potential to save this country from the constitutional stranglehold that gives a President near-absolute power, and to a handful of political investors in our ruling parties, unfettered access to the wealth of Ghana, a looting spree to gratify their insatiable greed.

If Ghanaians have been crying for change, this is the change they seek.

It is a change from a democracy which gives power to the President to dispense with meritocracy in the Public Service and appoint whom he chooses, even Public Relations Officers of SOEs! As if foisting CEOs on public service institutions were not sinful enough! 

The Ghanaian democracy has made it possible for the political CEOs to assume office with their own set of staff (usually party people and blood relations), as secretaries and Personal Assistants, claiming they don’t trust the neutrality of the professional civil servants.

To make way for some of these appointees, the professional civil servant is sent on transfer if they are not party people. 

As a cure for this injustice and unfairness, the H Kwesi Prempeh Committee reasons that, “the nature and extent of the discretion enjoyed by a President in making an appointment to a public office” must depend on the nature of the office in question.  

“Towards this end, the Committee classifies appointments under the Constitution into four, namely EXECUTIVE OFFICES, INDEPENDENT OFFICES, HYBRID-INDEPENDENT OFFICES AND HYBRID-EXECUTIVE OFFICES” (caps mine).

“In respect of an appointment to a Hybrid-independent office, the President shall make the appointment acting in accordance with the advice of a relevant Nominating body or Governing Council, FOLLOWING A COMPETITIVE, MERITOCRATIC SELECTION PROCESS ADMINISTERED INDEPENDENTLY BY THAT BODY OR COUNCIL.

THE POLICY-DIRECTING GOVERNING COUNCIL WILL PROPOSE THE NOMINEE FOR APPOINTMENT AFTER A COMPETITIVE MERITOCRATIC RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION PROCESS BASED ON STATED QUALIFICATIONS AND CRITERIA.” (Caps mine).

Additionally, “the term of office of persons in this category shall not be co-terminus with the term of office of the president”.

This, in my view, is one cure for the evil called ‘Winner Takes All’, the source of all the evils - the killings, the corruption, etc. - associated with Ghana’s democracy.

Another “victory”, for me, is the recommendation that the salary, allowances and facilities payable to the President should be subject to tax on the same terms as every other person.  

I am a little disappointed that there is no cap to the number of appointees who serve at the President’s pleasure.

The loose definition of these categories of appointees is what has occasioned the packing of the Jubilee House, every four (eight) years, with hundreds of political appointees with all manner of job descriptions.

They are so well paid that within four years, they have a war chest to contest to be MPs.

“Proportional Representation”, one of the most important subjects which I had looked forward to, was unfortunately not “entrenched”.

Indeed, it even appears with a question mark.

It is a system of governance that enhances “opportunities for women, youth and other politically marginalised groups, including smaller political parties, to gain representation in Parliament”. 

My disappointment is that the Committee, after endorsing it, only recommends to the government to commission an independent study and investigation of the suitability of proportional representation for Ghana.

Yet, it is one system of government that leaves no one out.

Knowing the red-eye jealousy with which people in power have, since 1992, sought to guard their privileges, I will not be surprised that this recommendation will be treated with silence, UNLESS CIVIL SOCIETY TRUMPETS IT AND LEAVES GOVERNMENT NO VETO IN THE MATTER.

Another key recommendation that gladdens my heart would ensure devolution of power.

The committee recommends the election of MMDCEs rather than appointed by the President.

While at it, my hand is up. I vote against district level election based on political parties. Candidates should campaign on their own merit.  

Thank you, H Kwesi Prempeh Committee. I found out what the H stands for. Why does everybody opt to call him by the ‘H’?