Playing games with corruption

The man’s voice was choked with emotion as he narrated his ordeal of how helpless the whole institution was to pursue further action while persons who should have faced possible prosecution walked free. Mr Theophilus Cudjoe, a former acting Executive Director of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), could not hide his frustration when he appeared before the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of Parliament to give account of what he knew about payment of judgement debts to some organisations and companies including Construction Pioneers (CP). According to Mr Cudjoe, SFO investigations had shown that some public officers had questions to answer on how huge sums of the taxpayer’s money were paid to CP and recommended their arrest and prosecution. Unfortunately that was how far the SFO could go. The Act establishing the SFO, Act 466 of 1993, placed the responsibility for prosecution under the authority of the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice. That meant that all the powers given to the SFO were under one breath snatched away, effectively rendering that important national anti-corruption institution a toothless bulldog. The former SFO boss said nothing could be more painful than seeing someone who should be facing charges of causing financial loss to the state walking free and testifying on behalf of the same foreign company in London. Apart from the Attorney-General and Ministry of Justice having ministerial responsibility over the SFO, the governing board owed allegiance solely to the Executive and, thereby putting to severe test all proclamations of fighting corruption, should a member of the government be cited for corruption. According to Act 466 (Serious Fraud Office Act, 1993), the Governing Board consists of (a) The Chairman; (b) The Attorney-General or a Chief State Attorney as the AG’s representative; (c) The Minister responsible for the Interior or the minister’s representative; (d) The Inspector-General of Police or a Commissioner of Police as the IGP’s representative; (e) The Executive Secretary of the Narcotics Control Board; (f) One other person and (g) the Executive Director. All these officers derived their appointments directly or indirectly from the President, thus, effectively diluting any semblance of independence or autonomy in the SFO’s operations. Under the circumstances, many government officials were likely to escape prosecution for any acts of corruption or wilfully causing financial loss to the state so long as they remained part of the political apparatus. That was how the SFO, throughout its existence, failed to stamp its authority on the fight against corruption with the exception of a few instances when those caught in its net were mainly political opponents of the government in power. Remember the Quality Grain trials? The SFO was succeeded by the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), which derived its authority from Act 804 of 2010. The Governing Board of EOCO is not much different from that of the defunct SFO. Apart from representation from the Ghana Bar Association and the Institute of Chartered Accountants, all the other board members owe allegiance primarily to the President. Members of the governing board include the Executive Director, who is appointed by the President; a representative of the IGP; a representative of the Narcotics Control Board; a representative of the Attorney-General’s Office; a representative of the Ghana Revenue Authority; a representative nominated by the Ghana Bar Association; a Chartered Accountant nominated by the Institute of Chartered Accountants and one member nominated by the minister responsible for National Security. What has not changed is that the EOCO, like its predecessor, the SFO, is effectively under the armpit of the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, who determines whether to prosecute or not to prosecute public officials cited for economic and organised crimes against the state. What that means is that the government in power could decide to be protective of its members while throwing the searchlight on others. Today, politics has become lucrative compelling people to adopt all types of desperate measures to win political power, because while corruption and illegal acquisition of wealth is glaring, all political office holders and their collaborators in business and public service appear to be saints far out of the reach of anti-corruption laws and the agencies that are supposed to enforce them. Peter Cardinal Kodwo Appiah Turkson, President, Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace at the Vatican, made reference to this money-grabbing phenomenon that has taken control of our politics when he delivered his speech as the Guest Speaker at the 17th GJA Awards Night at the weekend. The Eminent Cardinal drew attention to the ‘winner-takes-all’ syndrome and politics as a source livelihood, or stomach politics as it is commonly described, which have permeated our society to the extent that our country is not only stagnating but actually retrogressing on the path of social integration and eonomic development. From the lamentations of Mr Cudjoe, it could be seen that our anti-corruption institutions as presently constituted by law are woefully inadequate and severely incapacitated to serve the purpose. If we are serious about fighting corruption, which has been identified as public enemy number one thwarting our developing efforts, we need to build institutions with greater independence and autonomy to execute their mandate effectively. We are proud of our democracy and continue to give credit for our success in holding elections to elect our leaders after every four years. What we fail to acknowledge is that we have come this far because of one institution – the Electoral Commission – which has been insulated against manipulation. We would be on the way to national redemption and separating the nationalists and patriots from the pretenders if we take certain steps to make it more and more difficult for people to take the nation for a ride. First, we must separate the State Prosecutor from the Ministry of Justice and the make the former independent and autonomous whose appointment would be on the lines of the Electoral Commissioner. Second, is to make the number one state anti-corruption institution wholly and truly independent and autonomous similar to the Electoral Commission. If we cannot do this, then let us forget the lip service and all the pretences of fighting corruption. *fokofi@yahoo.co.uk kofiakordor.blogspot.com

Chasing gold with broken jaw

We were too shocked and the state of mourning prevented us from paying attention to other things. Before we could overcome the two-weeks of national mourning and recover from the pains of the death of our president, the Olympic Games, London 2012, was over. Olympic Games does not come by chance. It takes place once every four years and, therefore, cannot take any country or group of persons by surprise. While host nations are given at least eight years to prepare infrastructure other facilities for the games, participating countries and athletes have not less than four years – that’s from the previous to the next games – to prepare. Therefore, if poor performance at the games was due mainly to ill planning and preparation not because we were overwhelmed by superior qualities by opposing athletes, then the matter should not be taken lightly. Four years ago, we were at the Beijing Olympic Games without Ghana’s name registering on the medals table. As a serious nation, we should have then resolved that 2012 at London, would have been far better than Beijing. Our performance or rather non-performance at the London Games clearly indicates that our interest as a nation does not go beyond ordinary participation. If that were not so, we had four years to prepare the athletes in the various disciplines we traditionally have our strength to ensure that our national anthem booms at least once during the medal-awarding ceremony. That was not to be. We live in a country where people bear huge titles which translate into hefty pressure on the national kitty in the form of salaries and allowances and other inducements. However, when it comes to responsibility, there is a huge vacuum. We have a thousand and one excuses for our failures, shifting blame from one person or institution to another until finally everything comes to rest in the bosom of the proverbial no funds syndrome. Can we imagine that we went to London knowing very well that the athlete who was our flag bearer at the opening ceremony had suffered a broken jaw in June, and was, therefore, most unlikely to participate in the games? Incidentally he was one of the nine athletes Ghana as a nation could raise to the London Olympic Games. Ghana had not been lacking in talents in the sporting arena. Boxing, athletics and, to some limited extent, football had won for the country laurels at international tournaments. At one stage, Ghana was regarded as one of the strongest boxing nations in the Commonwealth and had some of the best sprinters who rubbed shoulders with countries like Jamaica, Nigeria, Great Britain and Canada. In 1992, we became the first country from Africa to win Olympic Bronze in football at the Barcelona Games. We became so excited with our achievement that we did not realise it when Nigeria and Cameroun went ahead to win Olympic Gold in soccer in 1996 and 2000 respectively. Instead of improving upon these achievements, we have allowed years of mismanagement and our nonchalant attitude towards sports development to reduce us to mere passengers on the international arena. We abound in the talents that could be transformed into top sprinters to rival Usain Bolt and all those guys from Jamaica, Bahamas, Trinidad & Tobago, Great Britain, Canada and Brazil whose top athletes have their roots on the African continent. We have boxing talents nation-wide who could do far better than their great predecessors did in the 1960s and early 1970s before the slump set in. It will take a few gyms here and there to transform these youngsters and introduce them into the world of fame and fortune. We have strong men moving about town describing themselves as macho men. These are people who have deployed their energies in terrorising people at political rallies and acting as land guards. Some of these people could be transformed into medal-winning weightlifters at the Olympics if we put in place the right facilities to train them and redirect their potential energies. Already we are seeing with pride, the social and economic transformation some of our successful footballers are bringing into the country. It tells a story that sports in general has the potential of not only bringing fame to a country but changing the fortunes of its youth. We need to take sports development more seriously than we are doing now. The lacklustre manner our national teams are prepared for international engagements are not the best. Joblessness can be easily tackled to a very successful extent if the sporting talents of the youth could be given a more serious attention. Any serious investment in this regard will not in the long run become a wasteful venture. The decay of the Azuma Nelson Sports Complex at Kaneshie in Accra is a living testimony to the irresponsible manner we have treated sports development in this country. That facility was not only going to serve as a nursing ground for youthful talents but could also boost internal tourism as many would want to see the complex named after one of Africa’s greatest boxers. Alas, the place is not worth the name of the great Azuma Nelson. For the London Olympic Games, it will be remembered that we used the greater part of our time not preparing but feuding among ourselves as to who qualifies to be a member of the Ghana Olympic Committee and who should be the legitimate chairman. We have gone and come back without a medal. So far as the Olympic spirit is concerned, we have satisfied the main requirement of being a cheerful participants, but for a nation that cherishes its national pride, we have failed ourselves. Rio de Janiero is four years away, beckoning to the youth of the world to come and exhibit their sporting talents. Let us not be mere participants. Let us also stand up and sing our national anthem at a medal-presentation ceremony and watch our national flag being hoisted before the world. fokofi@yahoo.co.uk kofiakordor.blogspot.com

The morning after

After the initial shock and disbelief, the reality dawned on the nation that the unexpected had happened. The nation rose with spontaneity to mourn the death of President John Evans Atta Mills and celebrated his worthy and illustrious life in a fitting manner. From Tuesday, July 24, 2012, when the sad event at the 37 Military Hospital was broken to an astonished nation in a terse statement issued by Mr John Henry Newman, the Chief of Staff at the Castle, to Friday, August 10, 2012, when the late President was given a state funeral, Ghana, perhaps apart from the London Olympic Games, was the focus of the global media. The late President received so much attention, not just because he was the head of state of a country called Ghana, but also as a result of his personality and the manner in which he managed the presidency when he was alive. While some of the copious tributes paid in his memory were done as a matter of duty, many, many others were a true reflection of how the man was seen, known and perceived of by others, whether as schoolmates, a teacher, workmate, fellow politician and the President of the Republic. The eulogies from far and near were unanimous on certain attributes that could not be said to be conjured by some fickle minds that want to play tricks with the people of Ghana. The words: honesty, humility, selflessness and love for others were like constant strings woven into fluid testimonies in President Mills’ favour. These are exceptional qualities that are very rare and could be exploited by close associates on the blind side. In the days, weeks and months to come, we should not be surprised to hear perhaps stories about how our dear departed President became a victim of his trust, confidence and abiding faith in others. Ghana emerged with strong credentials for the smooth and orderly transition, when the President’s death was announced. In other jurisdictions on the continent, under similar conditions things were not likely to go that way. An example just next door will illustrate the point. When President Gnassingbe Eyadema died in February, 2005, the Speaker of the National Assembly who, according to Togo’s 1992 Constitution, was to take over until fresh elections were held, was frustrated when his aircraft was refused landing at the Lome International Airport As part of the grand conspiracy, the Togolese Chief of Army pronounced Eyadema’s son, Faure Gnassingbe as President. This was fiercely resisted from within and without. Following pressure from the international community and resistance by many Togolese, Faure Gnassingbe was forced to step down and the First Deputy Speaker of the Togolese Assembly, Bonfoh Abass was installed President until fresh elections were held in April, 2005, which Gnassingbe won with 60 per cent of the votes. Keeping to the provisions of our constitution to swear in the Vice President, Mr John Dramani Mahama, soon after it was confirmed that President Mills had passed away, added to our democratic credentials, which are becoming the standard to measure Africa’s transition from authoritarian regimes to democracies. We did more when the President nominated his preferred candidate for the vacant position of Vice President in the person of Mr Kwesi Amissah-Arthur, who was unanimously approved by Parliament and sworn in accordingly. We have already proved twice that our political landscape is very formidable and cannot be taken for granted. The first was in 2000, when the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC) led by its candidate, Professor John Evans Atta Mills lost to the New Patriotic Party (NPP), led by John Agyekum Kufuor. The second was in 2008, when the NPP, led by Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, with glamour and glitter backed by all the advantages of incumbency, lost to the NDC, led by the now departed President, Prof. Mills. This is how we have come so far and any remote fear that Ghana will slide into a one-party state should be completely obliterated from our minds. The big question is: “Are we benefiting from our democracy?”. The answer may not be an easy yes or no. We can argue that we have tested all the institutions of state power with some considerable success. We have a legislature that is doing its best under trying conditions. We have a judiciary that has so far proved its independence and readiness to interpret the law and the provisions to the best of its ability. We have an executive that is constantly being kept on its toes, knowing very well that any slip will translate into loss of confidence and a possible defeat at the polls. We have a media that is free and very vociferous, sometimes to the discomfort of many people, especially politicians. There are many who hold the opinion that notwithstanding these laudable achievements, the nation is losing out on one of the greatest benefits of democracy. That is national development. The polarisation has become so sharp and the intolerance of divergent views so acute that both those in government and those in the minority very often lose focus and dwell on matters that have very little relevance on our national interest. We have spent the larger part of our precious hours throwing words at each other, while serious challenges, like development commensurate with the country’s abundant resources, remain back cases. The late President Mills had all the qualities any country will require of its President, perhaps too much of it. But did we help him to put his ideas on the ground? Well, some may argue that he did not open up to those on the other side. Some may also claim that with all his good talks, he was not able to stop the foul-mouthing from his camp. We have all been guilty one way or the other and there is no room for passing the buck now. We have proved that as a nation, we are ready to mourn the loss of a precious gem together. Let us also resolve to confront our social, economic and development challenges with oneness of purpose. All the political leaders, religious leaders and traditional rulers who spoke profusely about late President Mills’s virtues of honesty, humility, modesty, patriotism, dedication and selflessness pledged to make these a national culture in our political discourse. This is a challenge we should all accept with stoic resolve. There is no gain, when we say that we have been holding successful elections after every four years and that we have the freedom to speak our minds as provided for in the 1992 Constitution, without showing concrete developments on the ground. With the praises our governments have been heaping on themselves, this country is nowhere near the level we want it to be. We have no excuse because nature has been very generous to us in terms of natural resources. Our democracy must be seen to be working not only in terms of adhering to the provisions of the constitution. Our democracy must be transforming our practical lives at the individual and national levels. We made a pledge to keep the flame of commitment, dedication and fellow-feeling lit by the late President Mills burning. Let us not wake up the following morning and forget the pledge of the previous day. May we live up to our words and may our politics grow into a national crusade to defeat poverty, hunger, disease, hopelessness, ignorance and inferiority complex that has consumed the black race over the centuries. May we celebrate the principles Mills stood for and make our politics more decorous and tolerant. fokofi@yahoo.co.uk kofiakordor.blogspot.com