Puerile discourse
Sometimes one wonders whether party supporters value their own life interests or just feel satisfied to support a political party. Indeed, some marvel at the length that party activists go to indulge in violent conduct in defending the interest of their political parties.
Advertisement
Last week, the Graphic Communications Group Limited organised a Town Hall meeting for political parties and other interest groups to state their commitment towards peaceful and orderly conduct of partisan electioneering and elections. At the function, the regional director of the National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE) made a profound statement about why no Ghanaian should think of engaging in any violent conduct in the name of a political party or candidate.
He noted that at the end of every four years, the President and Members of Parliament would receive their ex gratia awards, but ordinary citizens who engaged in violent conducts would not even be remembered by their names, at best, they become part of a useless statistics of those who have suffered or been involved in electoral violence.
Expectations were that party activists would ponder over the statement and make a conscious effort to play their part as party supporters within the limits of the law. But we did not have to leave the Tyco Hotel Abusua Hall to hear of a near fisticuffs between two party communicators. The basis for the close exchange was the allegation by the outgoing moderator of the Presbyterian Church of Ghana that some politicians attempted to bribe him with USD100, 000, promise of a house at Traasaco Valley and a four wheel drive.
The question then is, who or which politician attempted to bribe Rev. Prof. Martey that communicators from two parties have to fight as to whether the allegation is true or false. What will those party communicators gain if the allegation is true or otherwise? Is it not more functional for communicators of all the political parties to be in agreement that whether the statement is true of false we must look at politicians critically than to fanatically support or blame them?
Basically, if a politician will take USD 100,000 of public or private money in addition to a house and vehicle to compromise the moderator, then we are doomed. In the first place, Rev. Martey has one vote. Every other Ghanaian has one vote. So if his views and vote are worth that much, its we the ordinary citizens who are being treated with contempt by our politicians. This is a matter that must grieve ordinary Ghanaians for which we must come together to fight corrupt and corruptible politicians so that there will be meaning in the statement that as Ghanaians, we are all equal and that no one vote is more important than another vote.
The other side is that if indeed, Rev. Prof Martey is presenting a red herring, does that not provide us as citizens a basis to come together to resist men of God who do not live by the tenets of Christ Jesus. So then, whether the allegations are true or false, there is an imperative need for us as citizens to come together to protect the national interest than to tear ourselves apart on the basis of the political party we support when the act for which we seek to fight undermines our sense of integrity and being.
We have had general election in this country since 1992. If there is anything called experience, we should have gathered enough to teach us a fact that elections are not won by violence but by using the intellect. Whether it is an issue of over voting or wrong transposition of figures, undermining the wish of the people does not come from violence. That is why our political parties must purge themselves of the use of macho men as agents at polling stations. They must use intelligent volunteers who can exercise vigilance at the polling stations since we know that elections are won at the polling station.
Personally, I hold the view that the trends in our discourse over whether the allegations by Rev. Prof. Martey are true or otherwise are not only sterile but also puerile. This is because instead of looking at the implications of the allegations on our integrity as a nation and people, our focus is on which political party or politician could have done that abominable deed.
If Rev. Martey is selling a red herring, then there is danger but if indeed public money was involved, then that is a greater danger to our professed democracy and constitutionalism. We must focus the discourse functionally to gain something positive for our country.