Two distinct issues

There are for me two distinct issues.  The Electoral Commission (EC) as an institution and Mrs Charlotte Osei, the EC’s current Chairperson.  The two are distinct and at the same time, mutually related.   

Parliament has summoned the Chairperson of the EC to render accounts on how much the institution collected and what exactly it did with monies they charged and received from replacing lost voters identification cards.  Members of Parliament would also like a detailed explanation for how much money was collected when the EC, under this Chairperson, took the extraordinary step of charging journalists for accreditation to cover the December 2016 elections.  This is process and proper. 

In a related and distinct move, Occupy Ghana has proceeded to court to compel the EC as an institution to release the annual accounts of the 24 political parties it has registered.  Their ask is that the EC fulfils both its Constitutional requirements and the relevant provisions of the Political Parties Act.  The legal ask is process and the court will determine if it is proper.  And this is disturbing.  A civil society group is resorting to court to compel the EC to do its work.  We cannot and should not have an institution as powerful as the EC flouting the obvious and refusing to be transparent unless they are forced to.  I wish Parliament and Occupy Ghana the very best in asking for and delivering to us, the essentials so we can all make informed decisions about the EC as an institution and the stewardship of its current Chairperson.

Mrs Charlotte Osei is no ordinary person.  Google her.  Her appointment to the EC comes with constitutional and legal cover, as well as responsibilities that deliver powerful and direct effects.  The Office of the President has confirmed that it has received a petition of alleged acts of impropriety against her.  The Presidency quite rightly provided no further information as to the details of the allegations made against her.   It is the media, including this newspaper, that has detailed the lurid back and forth between the Chairperson and her accusers, who remain for now anonymous ‘concerned citizens.’  Mrs Osei has rightly retained legal counsel, the petitioners have done same. There is now a formal process that requires her accusers to unmask themselves, stand up in court and prove their case or stand down. This gets interesting.

The petitioners seek to appear under the Whistleblowers Act (Act 720), enacted by Parliament in 2006, it is a tool to fight corruption by giving cover and access to people to come forward and speak up within bounds.  The Act covers six types of improper acts by both public and private officials. 

1. Economic crime.
2. Breaking a law or failing to obey a law which a person has a duty to obey.
3. Miscarriage of justice.  This brings back memories of the revelations by Anas that resulted in a number of judges being exposed, investigated and removed from the bench.
4. Waste, misappropriation or mismanagement of public resources. 
5. Environmental degradation (Stop Galamsey!) Endangering individual or public safety.

Act 720 defines the people and institutions to whom alleged acts of impropriety can be reported to.  Starting close to home  - your family head, a chief, the head of a recognised religious body (tell me this category does not include Kumchacha), a member of the District Assembly including the Chief Executive, your employer, a police officer, your Member of Parliament.  Should you choose to escalate, then there are minor characters that a whistleblower can report to such as the Narcotics Board, the National Media Commission, Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice, Serious Fraud Office, the Attorney General, the Auditor General, staff of our security/intelligence agencies, the Ghana Revenue Authority, the Chief Justice and the Office of the President.

Is it whistleblowing or witch hunting?  Both begin with a 'w', one is legal and it can in the wrong hands, be as lethal to reputations as the odious practice of victimising older women.   Act 720 tries to sieve the wheat from the chaff. Information provided by whistleblowing has to be reliable, it must provide full and better particulars - time, place, date - of where the alleged impropriety occurred, is taking place or is likely to happen.  The information can be provided in verbal or written form and requires the full name, address and occupation of the whistleblower. The whistleblower is also required to state the relationship with the alleged offender and if he/she has made previous allegations in the past including to whom this was made.  Basically, serial callers and phantom 'concerned citizens' need not apply.

The Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition has produced a simple guide to the Act 720 with answers to Frequently Asked Questions.  Here are two of mine.  Is it legally fatal that the identities of the petitioners against Mrs Osei is still unknown?  No they will be required to reveal themselves if/once formal proceedings are underway.  Yes if the allegations made are without evidence or basis, then given the swirl of publicity that this petition has received in the media, Mrs Osei will have endured weeks of uncertainty, speculation and abuse.  That is not proper.

Schandenfraude is a German word, it means 'the pleasure derived by someone else's misfortune’.  In Twi that will be ‘Otwea’.  Deeply unpleasant if you are at the receiving end, it is not legally defensible and it is very much at play here.  It took Mrs Osei a fraught and potentially dangerous 17 hours plus, to announce the obvious results of the December 2016 elections. It has been six months and we have still not received a satisfactory explanation for what happened behind the scenes during those tense hours.  Before the elections, it was the media that told us the EC had signed off on an expensive and frivolous rebranding.  Mrs Osei came out swinging like a champion then too.  "We like it. We picked it.  It makes us happy”.   Really? 

If her actions as Chairperson of the EC were/are improper as is alleged, prove it in a court of law and she should pay for that, not in the media.  I am certain Mrs Osei will and should fight from her personal corner and she must be given the audience and platform, formally and legally to defend herself against her accusers.  And it is important that Parliament, civil society and the courts are also asking critical questions about how this institution, under this Chairperson, is run.  The timing is interesting and so be it.  The EC, an institution I care about, and its current Chairperson are mutually related but not the same thing.

Like Dr Edward Mahama, I am at large, here, there and everywhere.  My new portfolio is unfortunately without presidential appointment and the relevant diplomatic perks.  What I do have is an editorial fatwha - 800 words, produced once a week to a non-negotiable deadline.