Monday,
December 9, 2013
Folks, one major pitfall in our
contemporary politics is that the Executive branch, as constructed under the 1992 Constitution is too over-rated.
A major drawback of our
constitutional democracy is the enormous powers vested in the President by the
1992 Constitution, especially concerning the appointment of public office
holders.
The President is enjoined to
appoint such office holders (sometimes on the advice of the Council of State
and other times using his own discretion).
If we are complaining about
laxity in our system, especially regarding negative tendencies such as cronyism
and nepotism, we shouldn’t go far to know why.
If the Constitution invests the
President with such enormous powers to put in office those he thinks can help
him do his work, but we (the ordinary citizens whose mandate has put the
President in office) have no means to restrain abuse of that concession, where
is the guarantee that we are part of the process toward refining governance in
the country?
Oftentimes, arguments have been
raised that the sweeping powers given the President don’t help us run affairs
properly. Already, some are complaining that President Mahama has appointed
those of Northern Ghana extraction to numerous positions in his government,
turning the system upside down and privileging nepotism.
The complaints used to be against
Rawlings for privileging Ewes, and Kufuor for running a government of Asante
cronies. Ex-President Mills was written off as effeminate or malleable and
appointing people to positions of trust who eventually turned out to clip his
wings. I have the Ahwoi brothers in mind.
Yes, and the President has
enormous powers to that extent. It is assumed that once the President has his
allies in positions of trust, they will dance to the tune that he calls. It is
nothing new.
The Judiciary has come up for
special mention in this regard. Some claim that the judges cannot rule against
the one appointing them. Of course, they may have their reasons. Who appoints
all these judges? Who determines their emoluments and conditions of service?
Not the President?
Parliament may have an oversight
responsibility, but in our situation where the winner-takes-all arrangement in
general elections allows the party in government to control Parliament,
rubber-stamping of anything from the Presidency (including the annual budget
and fiscal statement) isn't strange. Parliament readily endorses all that the
President does or forwards to it for ratification. Remember that the
Constitution even provides that two-thirds of Ministerial appointments should
come from Parliament. What a lousy way to rule a country?
Parliamentarians with an eye to
juicy Ministerial appointments will always speak well of the Executive in order
to catch the eyes of the President to be uplifted and given an appointment to
join the Executive and eat both ways—from Parliament (as an MP) and the
Executive (as a Minister/Deputy Minister).
How can we be so narrow-minded as
not to know where we are pushing ourselves---into a tight corner to feed our
politicians in more than one way and make it difficult for them to be loyal:
how can they function in Parliament to challenge the Executive that they are an
integral part of?
Our system of governance based on
this constitution is useless; yet nobody is doing anything to help us solve the
basic problems so we can “unshackle” ourselves and move on smoothly as other
countries do.
Can we wonder why nobody is even
revisiting the work of the Constitutional Review Commission whose
recommendations ex-President Mills accepted piecemeal for implementation? What
has become of the government's white paper on the recommendations that Mills
accepted for implementation?
Why is it that nobody is any more
interested in constitutional review? The hard fact is that even those pressing
for the Transitional Provisions to be nullified so Rawlings could be brought to
back have now abandoned that cause because they have reached a dead-end in
their agitations.
The system seems to be so
configured as not to cater to their demands; and what else should they do but
recoil into their shells, where they faintly complain about the inadequacies of
the system but won’t anymore play any frontline role in seeking reforms?
It is the usual Ghanaian thing.
Yet, these elements can’t stop seething within with anger at what is happening
in the country. They are chafing and biding their time in the vain hope that
when the pendulum swings in their favour, they will unleash all the venom that
they have been storing all these years.
Then, the cycle of do-me-I-do-you
runs at full throttle to worsen our plight as a nation. It is painful to
realize that Ghanaian politics can be reduced to this narrow scope of
lousiness. Meantime, those who know how to outwit the system, live fat on the
benefits while the majority of the people languish in want, squalor, and disease—all
ending in a painful death!
Why are Ghanaian politicians so
wicked?
I
shall return…
- E-mail: mjbokor@yahoo.com
- Join me on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/mjkbokor
No comments:
Post a Comment