1. If I ever had any doubts about the true and direct descendants of Adam and Eve, I am now certain that Ghanaians are. The Good Book’s account of creation is that God created the world and put man [Adam and Eve] in charge of it. God gave them dominion over all things except one tree, which they must leave alone and never eat its fruit. The serpent was included in all the other things over which man was given dominion.
2. However, the serpent, over which they had dominion, was the one who advised them about how to enjoy their dominion. They believed the serpent, not the God who created them and gave them a beautiful garden over which He gave them dominion. Suffice it to say that when God called upon them to account for doing just what he told them not to do, Adam blamed Eve, and not just Eve, even God, because He created Eve, and Eve blamed the serpent and maybe God, because God created the serpent. None of them accepted responsibility for their actions.
3. And that is just who we Ghanaians are. Ghanaians are unanimous that “galamseying” is the irresponsible and almost criminal way in which our gold is mined. And instead of accepting responsibility and taking a collective decision to stop it, we blame the law. Either the law which allows mining in certain areas is the cause, or the existing law, which we have not shown that we have truly tried to enforce, is not effective. The problem is the law, whether it is there or not.
4. That is the case with the OSP. We are unanimous that we need to fight corruption. We convinced ourselves that our commander in chief in the fight against corruption [the Attorney-General] is ineffectual in leading the charge because the law says the President is the person who appoints him. So, what do we do? We are convinced that the OSP [not the SP who personifies the office] is the best. The law that Ghanaians have faith but turn around to blame for our failings, therefore, creates the OSP.
6. The law further grants the President the authority to appoint the governing board of the OSP, raising additional questions about institutional independence. More troubling still, the appointment of the SP is preceded by a recommendation from the A-G. In fact, the law goes so far as to allow the A-G to appoint the SP directly, where the President delegates such authority. Taken together, these provisions raise legitimate concerns about the independence of the OSP and its ability to operate free from executive influence.
7. It was clear from the law itself that the whole law was a fiasco ab initio. We just went round in circles and arrived at the same point. We argued that once the President appoints the A-G, we cannot trust the A-G to enforce our corruption laws. Yet we put it back in the law. So, what is the problem this time? It is the law. The same law. We are reaping the benefits of what we sowed. Did we have the same experts who are speaking from the rooftops when the OSP law was passed?
8. Did the first SP not blame the President for his inertia? Then the second one came and still blamed the President for his inability to do anything worthy of a footnote in a book because the former Finance Minister is the former President’s cousin. The present one blames his woes on many more. A ruling goes against him in Cecilia Dapaah; the judiciary has ganged up against him, even when the ruling showed what he did wrong. He could not arrest someone, the forces at the time did not help, is his argument, but he has no evidence to prove this. Are there not others who still think his lack of fight is because of the presidency? The present OSP’s fight is more around media sensationalism rather than showing that there is a real a genuine fight he has put against corruption up but failed.
9. So, is the present cacophony really about the High Court’s ruling that the SP requires the A-G’s authorisation to prosecute? Just how difficult is it to simply ask for the authorisation? I am appalled that many people who convinced Ghanaians about their expertise did not look into the substance of the fight against corruption but simply took sides and argued partisan points. They exploit the collective desire to fight corruption to make their argument, but these arguments, subjected to very little scrutiny, expose partisan positions between the SP and the A-G.
10. The OSP has not convinced many Ghanaians that with his little power, he can do anything. Arguing for more power does not convince me. It is reinforcing his concentration on personalising the office and his quest to weaponise it rather than help his NO EFFORT to fight corruption.
11. Has the OSP shown that it is la ack of authorisation from the A-G, which has been the reason he has not been able to file one closing address in any case he has prosecuted in the law courts? Is the requirement to ask for authorisation the reason the OSP has, in one case, failed to take one meaningful step to progress a prosecution he started,d only because, each time, the court is ready to escalate the proceedings to the next stage, he rolls it back by filing a new charge sheet? Is the requirement to ask for authorisation the reason why, after he closed his case, Manasseh is required to come back and testify because he intends to start fresh proceedings in the same case?
12. Let the SP show by trying that the requirement to seek authorisation is unworkable. He should write for the authorisation and show us the A-G’s response refusing authorisation. Then there will be a genuine reason to sing the chorus about the law being the problem. There is a ruling part of which is actually legally poor. Show some character. Quash it, appeal and show commitment to prosecuting it. If the OSP shows he can and is willing to fight, some of us will fight in his corner.
13. The OSP has, throughout its brief history, not shown any serious efforts to discharge its statutory functions. It is only about complaints. I will not blame the law. I blame the occupants of the office. If we cannot challenge the occupants to be more responsible and to show commitment to fighting corruption, changing the law is pointless. Otherwise, let’s do as the Good Book has advised. Let’s just cut down that fig tree which is bearing no fruit.
14. This is not an ego war between the SP and the A-G, or a show of power like the arrest of Martin Kpebu Esq., who should have filed a complaint to CHRAJ about it. It is a mismatch. Pound for pound, even as private legal practitioners, this will not go beyond the usual round oof ne of three minutes.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
Source: www.myjoyonline.com