Ghana’s Parliamentary Democracy Must Stand The Test Of Time

By Reverend Father Jonas Richmond Atarah, Catholic Priest, Navrongo Bolgatanga Diocese

Ghana has practiced Parliamentary democracy for a record of twenty-nine years in the Fourth Republic. Parliamentary democracy in Ghana has so far yielded many fruits including peaceful co-existence, freedoms and development. Our Parliamentarians are the major stakeholders of our democracy. However, the recent happenings in parliament should be the concern of every Ghanaian and all lovers of democracy. The approval or otherwise of the 2022 Budget was characterized by numerical advantage whilst qualitative discourse was watered down to partisan political philosophies and agendas.

Our Parliamentarians must be reminded that democracy is not just about numbers but about what we say is our goal and responsibilities.

Ghana’s parliament used to move with the philosophy that the minority can have their say and the majority would have their way. But in the eight Parliaments of the Fourth Republic, the Parliamentary Philosophy seems to be that both Majority and Minority have their numbers and at the same time have their say.

How can we move forward with equal numbers and equal propaganda? The solution lies in applying patriotic philosophy in our national discourse rather than the partisan political discourses that have characterized the media discussions for too long. The two major parties have succeeded in conquering the mass and social media to the extent that they set the agenda for their gratification.

Radio and television discussions are mostly centered between the two top parties as if they possess Ghana. They have infested many media practitioners and cajoled listeners to talk according to their political philosophies. We are thinking beings and it is imperative that every decision goes through critical thinking, reasonable analysis and collective decision to create greater impact on individuals and the society. As we reflect, discuss and engage in decision processes concerning socio-political issues, we inevitably apply political philosophy.

For social discussions and national discourse to yield good fruits we need to consider the two laws of Philosophy.

The first law states that “For every Philosopher, there exists an equal and opposite Philosopher” and the second “They’re both wrong”.

In effect, any philosophical discussion whether in Parliament or the media involving NPP and NDC is already wrong on the altar of patriotic philosophy.
They can only be right when they discuss national issues as patriotic philosophers that objectively consider the real theses of social matters and their antitheses to make right syntheses for concrete application. Nevertheless, the major politicians have influenced professional bodies and independent organizations according to their political philosophies and agendas.

What can propel our democratic dispensation for comprehensive development is when we actualize our common and patriotic philosophy.

Mother Ghana needs patriotic thinkers to weigh opposite opinions for balanced judgements by all discerning listeners and policy makers. Our politicians, social commentators, and media practitioners must minimize partisan arguments and ensure patriotic discussions for holistic development.

The patriotic philosophy underpinning our beloved nation is freedom and justice for all and not for some. Parliamentary democracy does not mean parliamentarians alone should decide our fate based on partisan majority.

May our Parliamentarians reflect on the words of Thomas Jefferson who says “We do not have government by the Majority.  We have a government by the Majority who participates.” The onus lies with us, to continue to fertilize our democracy with healthy and patriotic discourse to grow instead of allowing a Constitutional drought to attack it”. As we end the year and project our plans, may we be reminded of the theme of the 2021 World’s Day of Philosophy based on “the enduring value of Philosophy for the development of human thought, for each culture and for each individual.”