Speaking truth to ourselves

Sometimes, when we observe certain developments that irritate us, we should be able to speak out so that we exorcise ourselves of every irritation.

But, unless we all come to the same understanding to commit to principles but analyse issues from any other consideration, be it political, social, religious, ethnic or sexual, we would always lack consensus to promote a national interest.

The story about some supporters of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) in the Assin North District breaking into the offices of the Youth Employment Agency (YEA), because the Deputy, not the constituency youth organiser of the party, had been appointed as the District Coordinator of the YEA, is not only sickening, but alarmingly disturbing.

If a matter between the two key leaders of the youth wing of the NDC could so incense some of the members to resort to impunity, with the tacit support of the beneficiary, and put him into occupation of the office to push out the deputy youth organiser, who has occupied the position since the government took control of national affairs in January this year, then it defies order and due process.

It is a shame that the police and party officials in the constituency stood and stared to acquiesce to the lawless act.

If it had been an opposition element, no one could have conjectured what the irate youth might have done.

Submission

That is why it is my submission that the national leadership of the YEA must immediately tell Ghanaians which of them has been formally appointed to the position, whether appointment letters have been issued to both of them and their terms of engagement.

Thereafter, those engaged in the lawless act and the constituency leader, the beneficiary of the criminal act, must be dealt with according to the law and due process. They must not be left untouched for their roles in the bestiality.

The youth could openly and brazenly show their angst because we have, throughout our independence, and especially in the lives of governments under the Fourth Republic, failed to distinguish between public office and political office or the state and government.

We, thus, falsely assume and live with the misguided, illiterate and misconceived notion that every state property belongs to the government and that all officers paid by the state are employees of the government in power.

We have had clashes between supporters and activists of political parties from the days of the Convention Peoples Party, under President Osagyefo Dr Kwame Nkrumah, the Progress Party under Prime Minister Kofi Abrefa Busia and the People's National Party of President Hilla Liman.

Under the Fourth Republic, the incident has intensified and become more diffused in the alternating governments of the NDC and the New Patriotic Party (NPP) as to who gets appointed into which public office or who controls which state assets, including public toilets and tollbooths, after general elections.

This might have prompted the Presidential Transition Act to provide a list of officials who work for the state but are considered political office holders, who must come and go with the government.

But with all due respect and deference, the whole gamut of political leaders, from the President, through ministers and all political office holders, are employees of the state paid monthly salaries, but who hold office at the pleasure of the President.

They do not have to compete with anybody as long as the President appoints them. Beyond that, the President or government does not own any public institution, for which only party activists and supporters are to be offered an unconditional promise of employment. 

Whilst appointments into any public service, under Article 195(1) shall vest in the President, he must act "in accordance with the advice of the governing council of the service concerned, given in consultation with the Public Services Commission".

Further, Article 196 gives the Public Services Commission the power to appoint, promote, set standards and guidelines on the terms and conditions of employment of public servants, which include qualifications for employment in the public services.
 

Article

Concomitantly, Article 198 guarantees the independence of the Public Services Commission, stating that "Except as otherwise provided in this Constitution or any other law not inconsistent with this Constitution, the Public Services Commission shall not be subject to the control or direction of any person or authority in the performance of its functions.

Accordingly, apart from political office holders, any promise of unconditional assurance of employment into a specific Public Service is unlawful, because it is discriminatory and offends the spirit and letter of Article 17(2), which provides that "A person shall not be discriminated against on grounds of gender, colour, ethnic origin, religion, creed or economic status" and it is discriminatory because the Constitution provides under Article 17(3) that "For the purposes of this article, 'discriminate' means to give different treatment to different persons attributable only or mainly to their respective descriptions by race, place of origin, political opinion, colour, gender, occupation, religion or creed, whereby persons of one description are subjected to disabilities or restrictions to which persons of another description are not made subject or are granted privileges or advantages which are not granted to persons of another description".

To assume, therefore, that because a political party is in power, its officials at certain levels are entitled to certain public offices automatically beguiles understanding.

Associated with such a de facto practice is that public funds would indirectly be used to support political party structures, which, even if not unlawful, cannot be justified.

It is, thus, unfortunate, assuming that the NDC promised and assured certain party officials of unconditional employment, that the unconstitutional act must be exposed with unjustifiable anger, in the midst of violence. 

I have a solemn confession on this matter because I lost the friendship of a very good and sincere friend and politician when I criticised the appointment of Mr Huudu Yahya, when as Secretary for the Committees for the Defence of the Revolution, to simultaneously serve as General Secretary of the party.  

I used my column then to suggest that the appointment was unjustified, even if not unlawful, because it sought to apply national resources to build a political party.

I still hold that position and think that it is unjust and unethical to place political party office holders in public offices and pay them whilst their loyalty is divided between the state and their party.

Such party officials who want to serve the state must resign from their party positions and compete with others for appointment into such public or state institutions for total allegiance. 

We should never promote and protect the indiscreet application of state resources to build a political party, even under state sponsorship of political parties.