Constitution review: How far can we dare to go?

In the next few days, I shall be going to the website of the Constitution Review Commission.

I have something to share. I have a suspicion which I cannot voice, because the names on that commission are Ghanaians whose brains I respect.

My proposal to the commission will be predicated on a number of questions:

One, is this country getting the best from the system we have chosen to govern ourselves by?

Two, can we, in all sincerity, give multi-party democracy, as we have practiced it so far, a pass mark? 

Three, isn’t it time to boldly jettison this Frankenstein monstrosity under which we are all too willing to subject ourselves to Presidents who are the most powerful human beings in Ghana – with powers which nothing, practically nothing, limits?

You guessed it: I am advocating a revised Constitution that will have clauses to eliminate the concept of ‘Winner Takes All’.

I remember Dr Kwabena Adjei, the former National Democratic Congress (NDC) national chairman.

The loudness of his advocacy against the system was followed by a deafening silence. For a while, thereafter, it was revived by a few clergymen, some academics and civil society champions.

Frustrated

My suspicion that more and more Ghanaians are getting frustrated by post-1992 goings-on is heightened by media commentaries in which one or two people have actually asked for a second look at the Union Government (UNIGOV) system advocated by General (later Mr) Kutu Acheampong.

When I read or listen to such yearnings, I tell myself only one thing: that nobody yearns for the return of a divorced spouse if he/she is finding pleasure and satisfaction with the replacement.

Like the man yearning for the love of his divorced wife, some Ghanaians are introspectively analysing our politics.

With the benefit of hindsight, they are openly admitting that Kutu Acheampong’s UNIGOV proposal could not have been bad after all; that it has merits. 

My own conclusion is that the reason most people, especially professional bodies, including Bar and Medical Associations, and National Union of Ghana Students, Catholic Bishops Conference and Christian Council of Ghana, opposed it was not because the system was unworkable, but that they suspected General Acheampong was seeking a means to perpetuate his rule which, by 1985, had become so stained with corruption and kalabule that his very name stank in our noses.

Question: If Acheampong was so bad, how come a good number of Ghanaians are today advocating that we give the UNIGOV proposal a second thought?

It is because the present system seems to contain its own seed of self-destruction, divisiveness and patronage, especially in the hands of people for whom politics means only one thing: SUVs, mansions and flamboyant lifestyle.

What is the wisdom in a system that allows the winner to take all, and turn our Presidents into monarchs of all they survey? 

Idea

My idea of a “Union Government” is slightly different from what Acheampong proposed. O, let me state this very quickly: nobody will lose his/her title, “Honourable”.

We shall still have Parliament. Parliamentarians will still be elected, but they will campaign on their own credentials, as respected, hard-thinking men and women of substance – and not on the ticket of a political party – not very much unlike the Assemblyman concept.

In like manner, the President will be elected not as a party’s flag bearer but on his or her own credentials.

He will pick his Cabinet from among the best in the land, in consultation with civil society organisations and representatives of workers and the Clergy. 

Alternatively, is it not time to take a look at our traditional governance system – the process of electing, say an Asantehene or Ya Na; the appointment of the Palace Cabinet, etc., – and give the system a modern tweak?

I am convinced that this love affair with Westminster or American system of governance makes slaves of us.

It puts a full stop to any further search for a system that makes us vote in Parliament, not like zombies acting by the crack of a whip, but according to the individual’s conscience. 

I grant that my system may not be able to eliminate vote-buying; fine, but the system should not create a bureaucracy for corruption in a country where owning a car is more important than going down in history for noble accomplishments.

The reason behind our politics of insults is the same reason behind Ghanaian vegetable and fruit farmers packaging rotting yams, over-ripe mangoes etc., for export, to the point where fruits and veggies from Ghana are barred from entering Europe: inordinate lust for money. We seek “all the other things” and expect the Kingdom of God to be added unto us.

Above is only an intro. I am putting finishing touches to the full proposal, and it’s all against the “winner takes all”.

This system is the only reason we are witnessing the charade called Parliamentary Debates, the fight-to-death preceding Presidential elections and the seizure of state assets, including public toilets after elections.

The writer is the Executive Director,
Centre for Communication and Culture.
E-mail: ashonenimil@gmail.com
0208 178 680/0544 663 737