Chieftaincy and 'Democracy': which should replace the other?

Sankofa

I believe the above topic is one of the most important subjects that ought to be discussed and perhaps put to a national vote. I consider it to be very important because the system of governance of a group of people greatly influences their 'destiny'.

Some people (I refer to them as the 'Absolute Republicans) have questioned the relevance of chieftaincy in modern Ghana and have argued for it to be abolished entirely because it is only a source of conflicts, divisions and tribalism. The essence of their argument is that we will be better off if there is no chieftaincy with its associated 'conflicts'.

However, some other group (I refer to them as the 'Traditional Republicans') think that chieftaincy is important. If for nothing at all, it is the embodiment of our culture. As such, the institution should be modernised and not abolished.

The argument by both groups is based on two shared fundamental premises:

(1) 'Democracy' (politics) holds the key to our development and (2) Chieftaincy is problematic and anti development.

If the above premises are true then chieftaincy should either be abolished or modernised by our politicians. The argument also suggests that our politicians have been and will continue to be better than our chiefs.

The aim of this article is to attack the premises that 'democracy' holds the key to our development and that chieftaincy is anti development. It will also show that if we wish to develop, we must rather take power from our politicians (democracy) and give it to chiefs (chieftaincy).

An important question to address is the meaning of democracy. What is 'democracy'? Democracy in this context is Western Democracy which may be defined as 'government of the people, by the people and for the people' as defined by Lincoln.

As Ghana has pursued this system of governance since 1957 (53 years now), it is legitimate to ask the following questions.

(1) What have been the achievements of Western democracy in Ghana since 1957? (2) After 53 years, can we say that we understand the Western Democracy as a system of governance? If we don't understand, then abuse is inevitable. But if we understand, have we practised it to the letter? (3) Can we say that, democracy as it is been practised in Ghana today holds the key to our development?

The ultimate question is whether our country needs to practice western democracy before it can develop. I would like all Ghanaians and my other African compatriots to think and analyse the above questions carefully. It will take volumes of books for me to articulate my full view on the above questions but I will try to summarise my answers for the argument sake.

My answer to the first question is that democracy has done more evil than good. Below is my chronicle of some of the achievements of democracy since 1957.

(i) Ghana has had 14 different types and kinds political leaders but many assert that only Kwame Nkrumah who ruled for only 6 years was visionary. This implies that for 47 years, Ghana has been managed by 'try and error' leaders. The actions and inactions of these leaders have therefore contributed significantly to high levels of poverty in Ghana. Perhaps Nkrumah is still considered to be the best leader to date because the rest have failed woefully. Throughout this period, politicians seized businesses of individuals, took control of peoples' savings, and discouraged investment and maltreated entrepreneurs who were perceived to be opponents? Unfortunately, all these leaders had ministers who were paid from the tax payers' money. In fact, we need great economists to estimate the cost of all these failures to Ghana. I sincerely believe the politicians are the main reason for our retarded development.

(ii) Of the 14 leaders, majority died directly or indirectly at the hands of their fellow presidents/heads of state. The leaders did not die alone; they died with a good number of their supporters. It is important to point out that such leaders were killed after they had also oppressed and killed some people who opposed their rule. They did anything to win or hold on to power.

(iii) Every change in government resulted in change in government policy. The result is the lack of a clear sense of direction for the country. To date, we do not have a comprehensive national policy. May be someone can tell me, is it vision 2015, 2020 or what? Where are they taking us? They are only driven by when the next election will take place. As such, the policies do not go beyond 4 years. One of the results of this short-termism and lack of continuity is our retarded growth over the years.

(iv) They promised unity but they campaigned on the platform of tribalism. If there are any tribal sentiments in Ghana, it is the direct results of politics. The politicians say and do anything to win power. How many times have you heard chiefs of two different tribes contending? Not only is politics contributing enmity between tribes but it is now setting members of the same tribe against each other. An NPP Ewe man is an enemy to an NDC Ewe man. So has politics united us more than Chieftaincy? My answer is NO! It is dividing us.

(v) Freedom of speech whereby ANYONE can say ANYTHING about anyone in ANYWAY. Papa J (a role model to many people) called Kuffour (a fellow president) Ataa Ayi (i.e a criminal). And Kuffour also accussed Papa J of travelling to the Americas to secure money to topple his (Kuffour) government without any evidence to that effect whatsoever. Papa J say all sort of things about Mills. I was therefore not surprised when Nana Darkwa heartlessly accused Papa J of intentionally burning his house. Journalists also write and say anything about anyone. In the name of freedom of speech, respect for the elderly and for one another is gradually and dangerously eroding. Do we really understand this 'democracy' thing? This freedom to insult and falsely accuse one another does not pertain here in UK, the masters who exported this system of governance to us.

(vi) They talk about creating employment yet they kill local entrepreneurs by attacking them if they are perceived to belong to opposition parties. They have killed the very source of employment and development. Examples of such cases include Appiah Menkah and Kinapharma. And did you hear after the election 2008 that Databank was bankrupt? Politicians did that and not chiefs!

(vii) Instead of government of the people by the people and for the people, it has become government of the people by the people BUT for the party members.

In 2001, NPP made perceived NDC people in key government positions to proceed on leave as if those people were not Ghanaians or were not competent. The NDC is doing the same thing and I can guarantee you that if NPP returns to power, they will give back the positions to NPPians. People proceed on leave with their pay and benefits. Who pays for that? Our taxes of course, yet they claim to have the interest of the poor at heart. People in the civil service are removed from office indiscriminately regardless of their competence.

Even small scale businesses do not run their enterprises like that. But that is what is sadly happening with the serious business of managing a whole country. Who suffers in the end?

(viii) Selective justice - they don't send their own to the law courts except their opponents. That is how they fight corruption.

(ix) Politicians meddle in chieftaincy thereby creating disagreements and conflicts.

Nkrumah towed the line of his colonial masters by dividing Asanteman to create Brong Ahafo region for political expediency. In 1998, a delegation from the then NDC government was sent from castle to recommend Nana Akwasi Agyemang (an NDC man then) as Asantehene. Did the Techimanhene say that he has the support of government or his government is in power? Some people believe that the NPP had a hand in the killing of Ya Na and they (NPP) also 'installed' the Ga Mantse, hence the resolve of a faction not to recognise him (Ga Mantse). They (politicians) then turn around and accuse the chieftaincy institution of been a source of conflicts when it is in fact their underhand dealings (because of their mischievous intentions) which create many of such conflicts.

(x) An extension of this argument to the whole of Africa gives compelling reasons why Ghana must take a critical look at 'democracy'. It is a common fact that democracy is not working anywhere in Africa. Many conflicts have plagued this continent as a result. Because of these conflicts, from 1969 – 2002 alone, in only six countries, 2,500,000 HUMAN BEINGS lost their precious lives (see the table below).

Ghana is seen as a beacon of hope to other African countries as far as democracy is concerned. However, we are still not developed and classified as a poor country after 53 years. You would therefore agree with me that something is fundamentally wrong, and it is the so called western democracy. As you cannot expect a different result if you keep on doing the same thing, there must be change in our system of governance. We cannot blame our chiefs for our past failures because for the 53 years to date, politicians have been in absolute control of all our natural resources.

The point I wish to make is that we DON'T necessarily need to practice Western Democracy in order to develop. The great Roman Empire and other ancient empires did not practice democracy. The former Soviet Union used socialist system but was world superpower. Singapore was transformed into a developed country through 'dictatorship' and not democracy. Is there any example today? The answer is YES! China is developing at a 'threatening' pace to the West but they are considered to be 'undemocratic' by the West. Given the failure of democracy in Africa as a whole, I implore the people of China to resist with all their might attempts by the West to export democracy to them. They don't need it!

My proposition is that if culture is a way a group of people live, then the best form of governance must come from the way a group of people live (their culture). That is why I am not the least surprised by the poor performance of Western Democracy in Ghana and Africa. As the name suggests, it is Western Democracy, a system of governance which evolved out of their culture. That is why it is not working in Ghana. It is not working 'properly' anywhere in the world apart from the West. Is it going to work – in Ghana and Africa - at all? May be it will work but the price that we (Africa and for that matter Ghana) are paying for it is too dear. So what then is the way forward for Ghana?

Stay tuned.
Long live Ghana!
Long live Africa!!

Kwabena Boateng
[email protected]