“Every person in Ghana, whatever his race, place of origin, political opinion, colour, religion, creed or gender shall be entitled to the fundamental human rights and freedoms of the individual contained in this Chapter (Chapter five) but subject to respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for the public interest”― Article 12(2) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana.
To give meaning to this provision, Article 17(1) states that “All persons shall be equal before the law”, whilst 17(2) states that “A person shall not be discriminated against on grounds of gender, race, colour, ethnic origin, religion, creed or social or economic status.”
The typology clearly includes political party affiliation or membership.
Clarity is given to the provisions when Article 17(3) state that, “For the purpose of this article, discriminate means to give different treatment to different persons attributable only or mainly to their respective descriptions by race, place of origin, political opinions, colour, gender, occupation, religion or creed, whereby persons of one description are subjected to disabilities or restrictions to which persons of another description are not made subject or are granted privileges or advantages which are not granted to persons of another description”.
Immediately after the elections on December 7, 2024, there were incidents of diffused politically partisan violence.
There were many of us who argued, that something needed to be done about it and we thoroughly denounced the inaction of the police in stemming the tide.
The expectation of those who wanted the deviants to be prosecuted was that they would be taken through the due process and rule of law.
There were other Ghanaians who felt that because of the heightened volatile political tension at the time, especially before Dr Mahamudu Bawumia conceded defeat and allowed the Electoral Commission (EC) to declare the results,there was the need for reprieve by letting sleeping dogs lie.
They explained that we did not need to turn fire into a conflagration or inferno.
Concomitantly the hoodlums got away.
The government was, however, held liable and subjected to diverse invectives.
In the confusion that beguiled the Ablekuma North results, which led the EC to act unlawfully in organising the rerun in selected electoral areas for only the candidates of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and the New Patriotic Party (NPP), some miscreants supporting the NDC, led by individuals some of whom are now occupying public office at the expense of the state, caused massive destruction at the offices of the EC.
None before Court
Again, none of the riotous group was brought before the law to give meaning to the provisions in the Constitution. As Dr Martin Luther King Jr has noted, when such things happen in open breach of clear legal stipulations, that undermines any pretensions to the claim of being a democracy, much less a constitutional democracy.
I have noted previously that Prof. K.G. Folson, one of the most outstanding academics in political science, has admonished us to stand up and speak against any revolutionary tendency that would creep into our constitutional democratic journey, whether for benign or malevolent objectives, because constitutionalism and revolutionarism are poles apart and dichotomous.
That is why I want to put on record and remind the Attorney General and the Ghana Police Service to do their work in consonance with the objectives of the provisions of the 1992 Constitution.
Once in a while, we hear people in the legal fraternity reminding police personnel about matters of crime that cannot be settled outside the judicial system, except through the processes of the courts, whether the lower courts, magistrates, district or circuit courts or Superior Courts of Adjudicature, High Court or Regional Tribunal, Court of Appeal or Supreme Court.
All acts of lawlessness and impunity are criminal and can only be resolved through a judicial process.
Criminal matters are not among those resolved through Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms, whether arbitration or settlement.
Thus, no operative of the National Security apparatus, has the legitimate or lawful power to forgive any act of lawlessness or criminality undertaken in the open or under the cover of darkness.
We need to demonstrate to our people that there are no separate laws for political party supporters when their party is in government or as the Minority.
Incident
The recent incident where a supposed task force of the NDC in the Ejisu District locked up the office of the District Manager of the National Health Insurance Authority (NHIA), on the spurious and puerile argument that he is not from nor known to be a native of the district, must not go unpunished.
Two things arise, both destructive of the democratic ethos.
First, it is no part of the rule of law that employment into public office that require certain skills must be to natives.
Secondly, whilst an NDC task force in itself is not unlawful and could help protect the public interest, it cannot and must never be allowed to operate as a public institution.
Such acts can happen only in revolutions, where the rule of law and due process are under siege.
If any group, for whatever reason, had gone there and sealed the office, the National Security would have speedily arrested and prosecuted them, but not go there and ask them to remove the items used in sealing the office and spit on Ghanaian by commending the miscreants for their cooperation.
During the Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo Administration, some hoodlums and bigots of the NPP went to the Ashanti Regional Coordinating Council and manhandled a Security Coordinator.
They were arrested and put before court, but they brought oil to fire when one after another, infront of the judge, they moved out of the dock and escaped.
Although the trial was before a Circuit Court, there were many who argued that but for the fact that they were loyal supporters of the NPP they should have been charged for contempt of court although the process is only applicable before the Superior Courts of Adjudicature under Article 19(12) to the effect that ” Clause (11) of this article shall not prevent a Superior Court from punishing a person for contempt of itself notwithstanding that the act or omission constituting the contempt is not defined in a written law and the penalty is not so prescribed.
Article 19(11) provides that ” No person shall be convicted of a criminal offence unless the offence is defined and the penalty for it is prescribed in a written law”.
Thus although in the case of the NPP deviants, even though they were tried and convicted, many well-meaning Ghanaians decried the fines imposed on them as not deterrent enough.
Good reason
Shakespeare argues in Julius Caesar that good reason must of force give way to better ones.
When supporters of a political party in government act unlawfully and are made to face the law, it gives credence to the fact that the government respects the rule of law and does not condone lawlessness or impunity from within the party.
That is what my roommate President John Dramani Mahama is expected to do with the Ejisu deviants to promote discipline.
When some miscreants in Tamale endangered the public interest during his first term, he went to Tamale and told them that if they continued on that path, the law would be applied.
That was the end of the bigotry.
When he allowed the law to take its course leading to the conviction of Abuga Pele, that was counted to him as a practice of good governance, because the Attorney General acts in the name of the President, in all criminal trials, on behalf of our nation,state and country.
Party activists and supporters who undermine and threaten the national interest in the vain name of the party must be dealt with according to the law starting with the criminals who locked the office of the District Manager of the NHIA.
This is imperative because lawlessness is criminal and all criminals must be prosecuted to justify their actions or inactions.
Beyond that, the taskforce must be disbanded or made to operate informally like any other Ghanaians citizen in the interest of protecting “national security, public order, public morality and for the purpose of protecting the reputations, rights and freedoms of other persons”.
Source:
www.graphic.com.gh