Our chiefs must be freed
Constitutions are legal instruments that provide the basis for governance of nation states. They define the ground rules that have to be systematically followed, whether written or unwritten, and provide safeguards for the rule of law and due process. However, just as Jesus Christ of Nazareth said of the 10 Commandments of God, the law was made for man not man for the law.
Advertisement
Therefore, whenever it becomes imperative that a constitutional provision is not in the best interest of the people, it must be amended to ensure that the people are better predisposed to respect the conditions of the law. If in following the rule, the fundamental interests of the people are undermined or that they are unable to freely express their view points, then the Constitution becomes a hindrance to good governance and must be reviewed.
There are a number of provisions in the 1992 Constitution that suggest lack of sincerity in us as a people. Some of them arose because of the circumstances under which the document was developed whilst others culminated from the different societal groupings which got represented on the consultative assembly which drafted the Constitution.
Among the areas which have not served the interest of our nation well are the fact that election to the district assemblies are supposed to be on non-partisan basis although we see the hands of political parties throughout the district level elections whenever they fall due. Another area is the appointment of district chief executives by the President when they are supposed to serve the interest of the district. Another problematic provision which has undermined the independence of our Parliament is the nomination of majority of ministers of state from members of Parliament. The other more invidious, is the provision which debars chiefs from active engagement in partisan politics or being elected as Members of Parliament.
For the past 24 years, we have toiled with experimenting with these provisions but any well-meaning Ghanaian can point out the fact that these provisions have not helped the cause of democracy or the course of constitutionalism. That is why there have been promises by some of the presidential aspirants that they would introduce amendments for instance to ensure that district chief executives are elected by universal adult suffrage by voters in the respective districts. Others have promised to review the non-partisan nature of district level elections.
However, when it comes to the involvement of chiefs in active partisan politics, we seem to behave like ostriches. While we consistently see chiefs promising particularly incumbent Presidents the full support of their subjects, going to every extent to extol the virtues of a politician, we have not done anything concrete to either stop chiefs from such acts or demonstrated a commitment to remove the inhibition against chiefs so that they would feel free to participate actively in partisan politics instead of pretending to be passive observers, whilst committing themselves to the President of the time.
Once in a while and depending on which candidate receives support from a chief, that whose interest such open support does not favour, lampoon such chiefs and call them names. Chieftaincy is a noble and revered institution. Majority of Ghanaians look up to their chiefs for direction and leadership. So where their chiefs support the party of their choice, they are satisfied. It is only when the chief appears to support the wrong person in the estimation of the subjects that there is problem.
What it means , therefore, is that by nature we are not against our chiefs openly canvassing for any candidate for as long as the candidate or party is the one we support. It is thus not uncommon to find out that it is much easier for chiefs in the Volta Region to openly canvass for the National Democratic Congress (NDC). Similarly, it is common to find chiefs in the Ashanti Region rooting for the New Patriotic Party (NPP).
We discreetly encourage chiefs to endorse candidates, whilst pretending that we respect the Constitution. Chiefs are Ghanaians and they exercise their franchise. They know the party to support and they do so in different forms.
The only provision in the Constitution about chiefs that is enforced is the one which bans chiefs from contesting elections chief as Members of Parliament. There have been chiefs who have abdicated to contest parliamentary elections and one Member of Parliament, who had to resign to serve as a chief.
We must not continue to act as ostriches. We have to allow our chiefs to participate actively in partisan politics and stop the hypocrisy. We must give meaning to constitutionalism. Removing these provisions would serve us better and make us sincere and be a better reflection of our claim to constitutional democracy.