Human rights, protests

No brownie points for second-guessing the topic for this week’s column.

Phew! ‘Ama Ghana has been boiling in a hot cauldron of human rights issues: freedom of expression and association, right to personal liberty, all spawned by the three-day protest, organised by Democracy Hub, drawing attention to the devastating effects of galamsey — illegal small-scale mining — and calling on the government to act swiftly and ban the act.

Protests are an important cog in the wheels of democratic governance and the right to engage in them is guaranteed in international human rights treaties and also in most modern constitutions, of which our 1992 Constitution is no exception.

This is because protests are an important avenue for citizens to register their concerns on very important national issues. It also assists governments in gauging the collective  mood of the citizenry relative to its performance or policies.

The recent demonstrations followed the time-honoured activism of citizens on important national issues. 

History

Our history as a country is replete with historic demonstrations that massively impacted our governance system.

The agitation for independence, including the 1948 riots, the many demonstrations of the Movement for Freedom and Justice, during the Acheampong era and the mother of all protests, Kumi Preko, against the Rawlings regime, easily come to mind.

Unfortunately, the protest by Democracy Hub, according to local media reports and the Police, had flashes of violence that, in a way, marred the narrative behind the protest march. 

Much as we as a nation cannot condone violence, at the same time wev expect the Police to exhibit a high level of professionalism in controlling mass demonstrations of this nature.

There are modern and highly professional methods of managing mass demonstrations which escalate into violence and, going forward, it will be a good call to urge the Police to up their game on that score.

The key to handling such violence, the professionals say, is for the Police to respond proportionately.

If some of the clips that later surfaced on social media and national television are anything to go by, it cannot be far fetched to say that the high-handedness of some of the Police personnel further exacerbated the problem.

The violence invariably led to some arrests and detentions and this is my major concern as a human rights lawyer and activist.

The arrest, detention and denial of bail for the protestors brought to the fore many of the changes to our criminal justice system which these columns have been agitating for: standards that are and have become good practice globally.

It has to be made clear in absolutely uncertain terms that I do not condone violence but what is irking the majority of the populace, and rightly so, is the response of the criminal justice system.

If the information being bandied about by the protesters and lawyers representing them is accurate, then great disservice to the upholding, promoting and respecting of human rights has occurred in proportions that cannot be countenanced or indeed swept aside with the usual nonchalant shrug of the shoulders —  business as usual.

Breached

A great number of fundamental human rights, prevalent in all the important international human rights treaties and which are guaranteed in our Constitution, were gravely breached.

From not proffering reasons for arrest, not allowing arrested persons to contact family and friends as to their places of detention, not providing sustenance and medical assistance, by far the most egregious, the denial of the right to a lawyer during questioning at the Police station.

As I have discussed before at length, the presence of a lawyer is essential to prevent the Police from intimidating an accused person who has never before come into contact with the criminal justice system.  

A lawyer can also ascertain vital information to use when applying for bail —  family ties, the availability of sureties, etc.

These constituted gross violations of the hallowed and internationally accepted standards of a modern criminal justice system.

The net effect of these violations no doubt had the cumulative effect of refusal of bail as the lawyers were not adequately armed with the necessary ‘ammunition’ to counter most of the grounds the Police canvassed at court for opposing bail.

The Police have a duty to uphold public order but, at the same time, due process and the fundamental rights of citizens cannot be compromised. In next week's article, we will examine in detail the violated rights and continue the crusade for promoting rights in our criminal justice system.

The writer is a lawyer.
E-mail: georgebshaw1@gmail.com