Honourable Afenyo Markin and the Register!
Today, I will not restrict myself to one issue as has been my practice in this column. I will touch on, if only tangentially, two matters which form the crust of our concerns as Ghanaians and which find expression in public discussions in all media. The reason being that, as we all get closer to the 2016 elections, matters which only yesterday did not appear important, have all of a sudden assumed some saliency and voices are raised in a shrill, uncompromising manner to give the false impression that every matter under the sun is equally important and relevant to our wellbeing
Advertisement
Tape recordings
First, as my initial example, why do some of us rubbish conversations captured on tape featuring public officials as fraudulent even before we have the patience to listen to it? How many of us have the expertise to unravel the unreliability of such recordings? As a general rule of thumb, what we hear without aural or logical breaks is very likely to be genuine.<
I say this to express amazement at the recent release by our mainstream radio stations of the tape in which the Member of Parliament for Effutu, Mr Afenyo Markin, is heard clearly demanding a hefty bribe to ‘’kill’’ a case he had taken to our Supreme Court to stop the public flotation of shares in the Agricultural Development Bank. Mr Markin is actually heard on tape claiming that he will do ‘’legal gymnastics’’, to enable the ADB IPO that he had sought to stop from going forward. As a member of the learned profession, some of whose members as judges have utterly besmirched and disgraced the profession via the Anas tapes, Mr Markin has his tape as an addition which is a doubly sad reflection on the profession and on Parliament.
Appeal to General Legal Council
I am not a lawyer. I urge the General Legal Council (GLC), which I understand, deals with disciplinary matters concerning lawyers to take an extremely serious view of this damage to the integrity of the profession. In fact, the GLC should, as a matter of transparency, and taking voters, taxpayers and all Ghanaians into democratic confidence, examine and investigate this infraction in public. We should not be satisfied with anything less. Of course, the police have started the processes concerning the criminal aspect of this case but you do not need to be a lawyer to know that it does not preclude administrative, civil or other sanctions from being pursued by relevant authorities. In addition, Parliament’s vaunted Privileges Committee must also conduct public hearings into this attack on its integrity by an MP. If the committee has not received any complaint to proceed, it is free to do so using this column as an initial valid complaint.
Secondly, the climb down by the NPP on the voters register seems to have been unnoticed by some of us. If I remember correctly, both the 2016 flag bearer of the party and his running-mate, Nana Akufo-Addo and Dr Bawumia, virtually threatened us all with mayhem and chaos if the Electoral Commission did not agree to its demand for a new register based on so-called research led by the running-mate. I say so-called because the call for a new register at the famous press conference failed to disclose any new, foolproof measures to prevent bloating and other shortcomings in the current register.
I say climbdown because I heard the flag bearer counselling all of us recently to give the new EC boss reasonable time to settle down into her new office before any decision on the matter, taking into account the roadmap for consultations leading to the 2016 elections launched by the EC. This volte-face, after the NPP-affiliated ‘Let My Vote Count’ group had embarked on a violent demonstration just to present a petition, resulting in injuries to some of the demonstrators, and obviously, acting in furtherance of the earlier threat to incite mayhem and chaos. Readers will hopefully recall I wrote on both events.
Thirdly, an aspect of this matter, the no compromise posture has really troubled my mind, which now , hopefully, is giving way to sweet reasonableness as I have just pointed out. I must confess this following historical insight into the NPP demand for a new register was given me before the NPP climbdown, but it is still relevant to an appreciation of how some of us do our politics.
The Hitler comparison
Just before the outbreak of the Second World War, the most vociferous opponent of Adolf Hitler in Britain was Winston Churchill, and he made this accurate observation about Hitler’s insatiable appetite for power and control in Europe: ‘’One pound was demanded at the pistol’s point. Finally, the dictator consented to take one pound, 17 shillings and sixpence and the rest in promises of goodwill for the future.’’ In 2012, the NPP demanded a biometric register together with verification before they would participate in the elections. They were beaten fair and square even after we had provided their expensive demands. Nevertheless, the party proceeded to the Supreme Court to challenge the results. After eight gruelling months, the party lost and the winner declared by the Electoral Commission eight months earlier was affirmed by the court.
Another election beckons in 2016, and this time they want the register that they vehemently fought for in 2012 to be changed. Of course, the NPP court case sought to rely on the same register to claim victory for its flag bearer. There is, thus, no difference in tactics between Herr Hitler and the NPP. Aggressive, uncompromising and unreasonable demands which eventually ended in the Second World War with a sorry suicide in the Berlin Bunker being the benediction to this utterly negative phase in human history.
If you think this is hyperbolic, consider this. Nana Addo’s opponents in the NPP, personified in the popular imagination by chairman Afoko and Secretary Kwabena Agyepong are only six per cent of the NPP electorate because he secured 94 per cent of the party vote but the differences so far have resulted in the horrific death of a regional boss of the party. Imagine the party winning with about 40 per cent voting against. We shall not have peace in this land.
