Corruption poses danger to national stability

There was a time when Ghanaians were walking long distances to work without complaining. That was when there was a nationwide shortage of fuel and vehicles had to queue for days for a few gallons of fuel because the product was being rationed. In those days, students decided to abandon the classrooms and lecture halls for a whole a year to cart cocoa which had piled up in the remotest parts of the producing regions to the ports of Takoradi and Tema for no fee. There were food shortages as result of drought and bush fires and food imports were limited because of the country’s precarious foreign exchange position. Even though people were hungry, very few blamed the government of the day for what, by all indications, was a national calamity. Everybody, or at least the majority of the people, felt there was a price to pay for nation-building, if even it meant enduring some form of hardship today for a better tomorrow. In those days, Ghanaians proved that they were prepared to make sacrifices as their contribution towards a better future. Time has the magic power of eroding sad episodes from our memories. At best, they seem so remote and insignificant as they recede deeper into history. Those old enough would remember that those were the days following the June 4, 1979 uprising which toppled the government of the Generals led by Lt Gen. F.W.K Akuffo. Things were not easy in those days, but Ghanaians survived in the belief that it was a necessary sacrifice for happier times in the future. The situation was repeated after the December 31, 1981 coup which overthrew the government of Dr Hilla Limann. Conditions in the days following the coup which was declared a revolution were very harsh as a result of international isolation and natural disasters such as drought and bush fires. The nation survived because of the trust majority of the people had in the political leadership of Flt Lt J.J. Rawlings. Once people came to believe that the political leadership was not taking undue advantage of them and that members of government were practising what they were asking the people to do, there was very little room for complaints. The perceived incorruptibility of the leadership was the strength of the government and served as an inspiration for the generality of the population. If Ghanaians were ready to make sacrifices yesterday, it means they can make sacrifices today, but on condition that the leadership is leading the way in making those sacrifices. Once there is a credibility gap, any appeal to the citizens to make sacrifices will not yield positive responses. The crisis we are in today has a lot to do with perceived corruption in high places. The lifestyles of many people in political leadership do not offer any inspiration for others to make sacrifices for a better tomorrow. The best form of leadership is by example. If the government is complaining that the country has not got enough money with which to do legitimate business but can afford to buy expensive vehicles for the use of a few people, it will naturally find itself in a tight corner trying to impress upon agitating professionals that there is not enough to pay them their due entitlements. For a country that is always on the move begging for support from countries that yesterday were its classmates, it is strange to see in its presidential fleet and that of ministers vehicles that the Presidents of China, South Korea and India, countries that have become our benefactors, hardly use. Under the circumstance, it is a tall proposition trying to convince people that this is a country in which money is scarce. Apart from the excessive expenditure for the comfort of a few, there is massive leakage of resources through various forms of malpractice. The public institutions tasked with the responsibility of checking corruption in public places lack the strength and capacity to execute their mandate. All of them, to the letter, at the end of the day derive their authority from the President of the Republic and, therefore, are functionally impotent to make any impact. The former Serious Fraud Office (SFO) (now the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO)) and the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), in their current form, can at best do the barking but cannot bite. Until the law establishing EOCO in particular is amended to give it full autonomy like that enjoyed by the Electoral Commission, there is very little that body can do, especially when it comes to matters involving members of government. As it is now, any pretence that the country has powerful anti-graft laws should be discarded. Once there is very little public confidence in these institutions, the perception that there is corruption in high places will create very little room for nationalism and patriotism, two basic ingredients that can hold a country together and set it on a path towards development. fokofi@yahoo.co.uk kofiakordor.blogspot.com