A test case for the Presidential Commission
It is gratifying to learn that the Presidential Commission of Inquiry has summoned two sports personalities to appear before it to ascertain reported allegations that they made against a member of the commission during separate interviews they granted a radio station in Accra last week.
Advertisement
The august commission, chaired by Mr Justice Senyoh Dzamefe, must have felt scandalised by the reported allegations which sought to impugn the integrity of the honourable member.
We do not intend to recount the allegations here, but as indicated by our lead story, the member in question could be using his new-found position to execute an agenda that he and other members of a group had long plotted against the Ghana Football Association (GFA).
The specifics of that alleged plot cannot be enumerated here, but suffice it to say that the summary effect was to weaken the FA’s growing assertion of autonomy and apparent disrespect for governmental authority.
Whether this is true or just a figment of someone’s imagination is not the issue in contention here. What is contentious is whether or not the member of the commission being mentioned was, in fact and indeed, a member of the so-called anti-FA group of the recent past.
The matter becomes even more serious when it is conjectured that his membership of the commission is a carry-over and, perhaps, a continuation of the witch-hunt of the FA.
This thinking may be a wicked one, or so it seems, calculated to bring the work of the commission into disrepute, as any findings against the FA and its members will be taken with a pinch of salt. And that will surely be a waste of everybody’s time, we dare say.
This is why we must applaud the commission for its quick-silver act of interrogating the matter by subpoenaing the two personalities who made the allegations.
However, we want to walk the tightrope here, so that we do not fall into contempt and get summoned as we try to establish some few facts relating to the commission.
In its statement contained in our story, the commission categorically denied the allegation that its member ever played the alleged role, meaning that the members met over the matter and were convinced by their member, with all due respect and apology to the commission, haven’t it prejudged the case already by its categorical statement denying the allegations against its member, if we can ask?
And what will the commission do if the allegations against its member are substantiated by those it has summoned?
Meanwhile, we do not doubt the capability of the commission, as we believe it will handle this dodgy issue with tact.