Parliamentarians Must Protect Ghana’s Democracy

NEWS COMMENTARY ON THE NEED FOR PARLIAMENTARIANS TO PROTECT GHANA’S DEMOCRACY

By Maximus Attah, Business Development Consultant

The chaotic scenes from parliamentary proceedings in these last few weeks, which has degenerated into a free for all fisticuffs were like movie episodes staged from well-rehearsed portions of a playbook of the Ukrainian parliament. The brawling, which is becoming one too many, has struck a destructive blow to the democratic credentials of our dear country. Seeing our Members of Parliament (MPs) openly trading blows on live television cameras and microphones on the 21st was a sad day and collective national shame and disgrace. For one of the most revered and key arms of government to act in a manner that mimics a destructive elephant in a Chinese shop flies in the face of Ghana’s accolade as a peaceful nation. Ghana has really struggled to come this far after the many turbulent years of military rule, where the rights of citizens were abused and people lived under constant fear and terror. People were therefore relieved when Ghana finally returned to democratic rule in January 1993. A generation of parliamentary democratic practice should have yielded more positive dividends for the citizens than the sordid spectacles we have been witnessing over the years.

One cannot decipher why the Parliamentary Chamber would be converted into a pugilistic ring where MPs with the strongest muscles reign, or that the chamber would be mistaken for an amphitheater, where citizens are treated to period skits of Stone Age grotesque movies.  Frankly speaking, the posturing of the three arms of government, namely, the Executive, Judiciary, and Legislature has not helped to engender citizens’ trust in the governance process. The worst culprit however and the weakest link in our bourgeoning democracy is the Legislature, who only agree to build consensus around perks and personal emoluments of MPs.  There is always universal agreement and unanimity on matters surrounding MPs’ car loans, often sadly, heavily subsidized by the taxpayers. Again, consensus is always built around the salaries and out-of-the-world benefits of the much revered Article 71 Office Holders. It is expected that the largesse of office are meant, firstly, to make our MPs live fairly comfortable lives and secondly, to give them the serenity of mind and the perfect ambiance for effective legislative drafting. Which is why the parliament house was relocated from the old Parliament House, near the Supreme Court buildings to the State House and the Job 600 office complex building also completed to provide state-of-the-art offices to aid parliamentary business for our MPs. However, the unending resort to fist fights and trading incendiary language when it comes to considering businesses related to improving the lives of the citizens exposes the intentions of the MPs. As a commentator said, “yesterday’s conduct of the MPs has reduced the already sinking image of our MPs to its lowest ebb”.

Why should our MPs hide under Parliamentary immunity to physically assault one another because they disagree on how a particular parliamentary business should be conducted? Developing nations are always berated for their inability to handle basic issues of governance, which is why Ghana has been touted as a model for emerging democracies in the Global South. That enviable accolade must not be dented by entrenched partisan and self-seeking manoeuverings. Again, our MPs have to learn to accept that they cannot become laws unto themselves. The same rules that apply to the citizens must also apply to the august MPs, because the MPs are Ghanaians first. How can our MPs be trading hefty blows because they disagree on voting procedure? Sometimes one shudders to ask whether it is the same House which passed the Representation of the People’s Amendment Act to help empower Ghanaian citizens in the diaspora to also take part in electing leaders for the nation. If our MPs want citizens abroad to vote, ballots which are highly likely to be conducted and transmitted via technology, what is preventing Parliament itself from deploying the appropriate technology to aid voting, and determining head counts on members present during a particular parliamentary business? Furthermore, it is possible to deploy Artificial Intelligence (AI) and face recognition tools to help determine individual MPs who attend to business in the house daily.  It is about time the parliamentary leadership explored how to effectively deploy technology for crucial votes so that an MP must not necessarily be physically present to be able to cast a vote on an issue.  In conclusion, the deteriorating image of our Fourth Republican Parliament needs urgent redemption.

Members of the clergy and traditional authorities can play a major role in tuning the minds of our MPs to become more reflexive, measured and more civil in their conduct because posterity would not be kind to them should the very people elected to represent the people throw our young democracy under the bus.