‘Winner-takes-all breeds political violence’
Participants in a constitutional review workshop have identified a correlation between electoral violence and the winner-takes-all system in the country.
Advertisement
They have, therefore, called for an inclusive government to stem the practice of elections becoming do-or-die affairs.
The 150 participants, drawn from political parties and independent constitutional bodies, were also of the view that job for the boys under the winner-takes-all system was undermining meritocracy.
They made the observation at the final broad consultation by the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) on the winner-takes-all practice of governance in the country in Accra yesterday.
The final broad consultation also deliberated on a range of issues, such as the overriding powers of the President in the appointment of public servants, the composition of the Council of State, the role of the Legislature, decentralisation and the funding of political parties.
Technical competence
The participants said the winner-takes-all system was eroding the technical competence of the country and the principles of bi-partisan support in governance.
The proponents of that view said when the President’s power of appointment was assigned to a different body, it could insulate the President from the pressure of finding “jobs for the boys”.
However, participants, who were of a contrary view, said assigning the President’s power of appointment to a different body would prolong the appointment of ministers and other appointees whom the President needed to carry out his agenda and mandate.
Mr Ken Dzirasah, a former Member of Parliament (MP), who spoke on the powers of government, said the recommendation by the Constitution Review Commission (CRC) that a body be formed to select people of merit for the President to appoint would prolong the appointment process.
He explained that the nomination of public servants to independent constitutional bodies such as the Electoral Commission (EC), the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) and the National Commission on Civic Education (NCCE) should be done by the President for a body to approve of the nomination.
Contrary view
Mr Hackman Owusu-Agyeman, another former MP, was of the contrary view.
He said the President had overriding powers to appoint and that the powers ought to be curtailed, as recommended by the CRC.
He, however, disagreed with the recommendation that ministers ought to be appointed from outside Parliament, an issue that was also extensively discussed.
The CRC is of the view that the practice of appointing majority of ministers from Parliament was weakening the role of Parliament as an oversight body and the practice of separation of powers in a democracy.
To some of the participants, Parliament’s oversight of the Executive was non-existent, as the Executive always had its way in Parliament to push through its programmes.
There was, however, broad consensus on the funding of political parties, but participants said there should be rules to govern the funding, as well as a ceiling to amounts that political parties could solicit to run their campaigns.