The madness at Ablekuma North

We seem to be like the vulture, which during every rainy season vows to build a shelter to protect itself from the rain, only to forget and abandon everything completely when the dry season sets in. 

My roommate, President John Dramani Mahama, recently charged the Inspector General of Police to investigate all incidents of violence related to elections since 2016, only for all of us to witness the dastardly incidents during the conduct of the latest election from 19 polling stations to "conclude" the Ablekuma North Constituency Parliamentary polls.

It is regrettable and sad that because of less than 300 votes, we went to all lengths to undermine the peaceful and orderly conduct of the polls intended to elect an MP, through counting heads rather than cutting heads.

Indeed, it is shameful and an act of sadism for any political leader or party supporter to feel a sense of pride about what we saw and make reference to what happened at Ayawaso West Wuogon, a reminder that we have become less intelligent and humane, going back to our vomit to lick it.

More shameful is the attitude of the police officers and personnel, who looked on indifferently as the hoodlums carried out their dastardly acts.

But the biggest problem lies with the Electoral Commission (EC), which persistently told Ghanaians, including Parliament, that they only needed police protection to conclude the collation of votes to enable them to declare a winner. 

Why?

Why did the EC, from the beginning, not tell Ghanaians that the resort to scanned copies was not backed by law and could trigger dissent and that if it ever happened, there would be a rerun, which may affect more than the three outstanding polling stations, as the National Democratic Congress (NDC) had demanded all along.

More importantly, under what provision of the various election-related instruments did the EC conduct the polls. I am asking this because there were more than two political parties which contested the Ablekuma North Parliamentary polls on December 7, 2024.

There is no rule or law stating that in any parliamentary election when collation has not been concluded for whatever reason, any rerun must be limited to only the two leading parties or candidates.

Under our electoral system and since democracy is more about rules and regulations, the legitimacy of a winner of a Parliamentary seat is based on the first-past-the-post rule, meaning the candidate with the highest votes wins irrespective of whether it is the majority or minority.

This is clearly different from the Presidential polls, where if none of the candidates secures more than 50 per cent of the votes, the top two contenders are made to engage in a rerun such that between them one will emerge winner. 

How?

More significantly, how did the EC expect the candidates to campaign meaningfully within nine days after a lapse of seven months?

Other pertinent questions include whether the results of the polls were declared at the polling stations on December 7, 2024. 

More curiously, does it mean that all the agents of the political parties, including the NDC and NPP, did not have the full complement of the Pink Sheets.

If so, then the political parties must rethink how agents are selected and who should be an agent.

Equally, we must review the process of accrediting polling agents. Since the parties have separate agents at the polling and collation centres why did the polling centre agents not leave their beats and surrender the Pink Sheets to the party or candidate, but travel to the collation centres, to do what?

Why do all manner of political party leaders, activists and supporters move in hordes to polling centres when there are accredited agents at all the centres? Is it right to admit public officials, political office holders and party executives and followers to move freely to and from polling centres?

Media

Turning to the media, is it fair and just to allow party leaders to campaign on the morning of a Parliamentary election when the general rule is that campaigns cease 24 hours to such elections?

And should, academics and political scientists glorify the results of such diffused violent-prone elections to posit hypothesis or questions, formulate theories and predict trends if the common sense theory propounded by Mr Nutifafa Kuenyehia, a former President of the Ghana Bar Association and Chairman of the National Media Commission (NMC) that the results of the elections at the national level is a gauge to identify hoodlums who engage in electoral violence at the polling centres is to be dismissed as not grounded on any scientific culture, then both Hawa Koomson and the gentleman who jumped on her like a Bob Lee film character or a lion on a prey, as well as those who beat the NPP Deputy National Organiser, must be investigated and punished as part of the ongoing enquiry into election-related violence.

We must avoid such bestialism before we go into the Akwatia bye-election when it is announced by the EC.

More imperative, the IGP and Minister of the Interior must note that the lives of Ghanaians are in their hands and they should not stand and stare because when the violence escalates, it will not discriminate favourably or otherwise against friends or enemies.

Violence does not recognise such categorisation. If President Juvenal Habyarimana of Rwanda had known that violence knows neither foe nor ally, he would not have allowed what happened with Radio-Television Mille Collines and the newspaper Kangura to have demonised the Tutsi.

He was consumed by the madness.

Question

A question I pose to the media is, who and who contested the Ablekuma North Constituency in the December 7, 2024 Parliamentary election? If researchers want to analyse the results of the polls, would it have validity when most of the media limited their coverage to only the NDC and NPP candidates and their votes?

We must note, as Joseph Pullitzer has put it, that, "a journalist is the lookout or the bridge of the ship of state. He notes the passing sail, the little things of interest that dot the horizon in fine weather. He reports the drifting castaway whom the ship can save.

He peers through fog and storm to give warning of dangers ahead. He is not thinking of his wages or the profit of his owners.

He is there to watch over the safety and welfare of the people who trust him".