What A Sagacious Ghanaian Farmer Would Say About The Plant Breeder's Bill

My father, Opanin Kwame Adade of Asiakwa, had a very sharp tongue.

If one of his children did something extremely stupid, he would address him as follows: “As for you, you've only the wrapping of a human skin draped on you for nothing! Beneath that exterior, you are actually a dumb animal.”

Yes, a human being by looks, and a dumb animal by behaviour. Isn't that the sort of categorisation that -- if applied to a sensitive person -- gets that person to go and look for a rope with which to hang himself?

My father's sharp tongue was developed as a means of bringing to order, the populace of Asiakwa, where he was the Queen Mother's “Okyeame” or Spokesperson.

Now, the role of the Queen Mother at Asiakwa was very interesting during my childhood. This particular Queen Mother – Nana Afia Boatemaa – was an extremely influential person. For she had been the actual CHIEF of the place (like Dwaben Serwaa of Dwaben, Asante) before abdicating and giving the stool to one of her 'children'. She thenceforth retired into her traditional role as Queen Mother.

This 'child' she put on the stool, known in private life by nthe incongruous name, Kwasi Kwadwo, had been raised in Akwamu and so didn't know much about the people of Asiakwa when he came to the stool. I put 'child' in quotes because members of royal families in the Akan area can often benumerous, and if a woman from the royal family of say, an Akyem town, marries elsewhere (most probably in continued furtherance of an ancient military-cum-political alliance between the Akyems and the Akwamus) the child would be brought up in Akwamu but retain his entitlement to the stool that belonged to his mother's family in Akyem Abuakwa. There is even a proverb that illustrates this: Cba s3 cse na nso cwc abusua! (“A child may look like its father, but it also owns a family!)

The short of it is that when Kwasi Kwadwo ascended the Asiakwa stool under the stool name, Nana Twum Ampofo, he relied heavily on Nana Afia Boatemaa in ruling his people. Almost all the disputes that broke out were referred to the Queen Mother first, before being sent to the Chief's court by way of appeal, if the verdict was not agreeable to one or other of the parties. The appeal was, however, practically of academic value only, for no-one in his right senses appealed against a decision taken by a Queen Mother who was held in such reverence by the Chief himself and and his court!

As I say, my father was the Spokesperson of the Queen Mother. No-one – absolutely no-one – could address the Queen Mother directly without passing what he had to say through him, the Okyeame. So he had real power, but he was humble enough not to allow it to go to his head. Because he was fearless in his fairness, everyone called him “Agya” (Father or Venerable) Kwame.

I, as his son, and also a grandson of the Queen Mother, became the de facto messenger of Queen Mother, who had to run and seek out my father, whenever an emergeency occurred in the Quuen Mother's house. (Once, | was so flustered looking for my Dad that when I found him, I 'spoonered' my message flawlessly: "Nana, Papa says you should please come immediately!")

I was thus privileged to observe my father at close hand, and discovered that he was simultaneously, both sympathetic – and stern! He was the sort of person the ''Talking Drums” (FϽntϽmfrϽm and Atumpan) lauded as:

Wo ho baabi yƹ Odum,
Wo ho baabi yƹ Onyina,
Woho baabi yƹ BrϽfrƹ
Woho baabi yƹ fƹtƹfrƹ !

(Part of you is the Odum tree (pure hard wood); part of you is the Onyina (softish); part of you is the Pawpaw tree (very soft) and part of you is the fƹtƹfrƹ --neither too soft nor too hard!)

My father, a major cocoa planter, came to my mind when I began to read the Plant Breeder's Bill which the Government of Ghana has presented to Parliament to be passed into law. The version of the Bill that is on the Internet is the worst Bill I have ever set eyes upon. Now, that is saying a lot, for I not only once served as the Parliamentary Correspondent of Radio Ghana, but also, I have actually sat in Parliament myself as a Member of the Constituent Assembly (1978-79), having been democratically elected to the Assembly by the Ghana Journalists Association.

The Memorandum of the Plant Breeder's Bill reads:

The purpose of this Bill is to establish a legal framework to protect the rights of breeders of new varieties of plants or plant groupings and to promote the breeding of new varieties of plants aimed at improving the quantity, quality and cost of food, fuel, fibre and raw materials for industry. [such verbosity! To deliberately confuse people or what?]

The version of the Bill published on the Internet next describes, clause by clause, what the Bill is intended to do, without actually quoting verbatim, any of the definitive provisions to be passed into law. For instance:

QUOTE: Clause (sic) 1 to 7 of the Bill provides (sic) for the scope of application of the Bill and the conditional requirements for the protection of a plant breeder (sic) rights.

Clause 8 to 14 deals (sic) with the application process for a
plant breeder (sic) right.

Clause 15 to 19 deals with the protection of plant breeder
rights.

Clause 20 to 33 maps out the scope and duration of plant breeder rights....

Clause 51 to 53 relates to appeals.

Clause 54 to 61 provide for miscellaneous matters. UNQUOTE

You read this Bill and ask yourself: was this Bill drawn up by aliens from Mars?

Answer: No! It was drawn up by officials of the Ministry of Agriculture, drafted by the Parliamentary Draughtsmen of the Ghana National Assembly, and presented to our Parliament by our Minister of Agriculture, whose appointment was approved by Parliament!

Question: Do these people know that FARMING is the occupation of a majority of Ghanaians?

Answer: I suppose they do! After all, the Ministry of Agriculture must know that it could not pay a single member of its staff without money from the sale of cocoa, which, the staff should know, is the source of more than half of Government revenues.

Question: Are the majority of Ghanaian farmers literate?

Answer: Unfortunately not!

Question: If farming is the occupation of a majority of Ghanaians, and the majority of farmers are illiterate, shouldn't any legislation that affects farmers interests be couched in such clear and simple terms that the farmers can understand it? In fact, should the legislation not be translated into Ghanaian languages by acknowledged linguists so that it could be read directly to the farmers for them to understand the provisions of the legislation?

Answer: Yes, in a country in which the administration was mindful of its duty to the populace, those would be primary considerations. The proponents of the legislation would go into the countryside, read the provisions of the legislation to farmers' groups and test their understanding of the Bill's proposals. They would take account of the farmer's reactions and modify the provisions to reassure the farmers that the legislation was in THEIR interest.

Question: Why has this not been done? Why is the Bill in the form you have presented here?

Answer: Because we have in Ghana, only what is termed as a formal democracy. The populace take part in a mechanistic process called an election every four years, and then sit and watch, as the party that allegedly obtained the largest number of votes in the election, rules the country in any way it likes.

We have no well-organised interest groups.

We have few pressure groups.

Our media are largely what the Nigerians call mumu. (deaf and dumb!) They concern themselves with political gossip and verbal warfare between politicians. Give them a tape of an alleged recorded conversation between politicians and they will go to town with it for months. But give them an issue that will affect the livelihoods of the people whose hard work pays for education, health, and half of the expenditure of bloated executive and they will have nothing to say about it.

Our Parliament, for its part, has become a “club” in which government and opposition members tacitly agree not to “wreck the boat”. How often has the Opposition asked URGENT QUESTIONS in Parliament? Or are there no urgent issues to question the executive about?When our MPs go on visits through the Comonwealth Parliamentary Association (for instance) do they observe how Parliament is run in other countries? Do they know that the Business of The House always makes provision for Minority Group Motions and issues? When last did our Minority Group initiate a debate on any issue? Do they know that if they revolt against an overbearing Speaker, who tries to suppress them,the Speaker will have to resign because the Minority Group could make the work of Parliament difficult --or impossible -- through the quorum system?

It seems that both sides of the House are aware that if they co-operate together, they can make life much better for all their Members.

With good salaries and allowances.

And very good retirement benefits.

The Government, knowing how vulnerable MPs are, does what it likes.

And the Opposition is largely forced to pretend that it cannot do much to prevent the Government from doing what it likes.

Hence, you have a Bill presented to a Parliament whose electors include a great number of farmers, seeking to protect companies – both local and foreign – AGAINST OUR OWN POOR FARMERS!

Think: would even the colonial government have stooped to do this? Suppose the colonialists had charged our cocoa farmers money if the farmers changed the cocoa they planted from the Amenolado to the Amazon/Carib varieties? Suppose WACRI [now CRIG] had arbitrarily imposed a levy, through legislation, on cocoa farmers who “utilised” the results of its experiments at Tafo? Could Ghana have become, historically, the largest cocoa producer in the world? Could Ghana have continued to be the producer of premium cocoa – THE BEST COCOA – in the world, in fact?

But we are now ruled by a Government that puts foreign interests – the interests of companies like MONSANTO – above the interests of its own farmers.

Our Government officials enjoy a luxurious existence on the backs of our farmers, whilst leaving the rest of the populace at the mercy of dumsϽ and other deprivations. What do they care?

My father would describe those who attempt to cut the throats of the most productive workers in their own country, in order to placate foreign companies, as people who have only got a human skin draped over them but are not humans, under the skin.

I do hope that our revered legislative draughtsman, Mr Justice V.C.R.A. Crabbe, is in good enough health, at his great age, to take a good look at this Plant Breeder's Bill (UNASKED!) and tell those responsible for it why it is unconstitutional-- inasmuch as it flouts, at the very least, the Directive Principles of State Policy, as enshrined in the Constitution.