“This rivalry has also led to the abandonment of projects initiated by preceding governments irrespective of the relevance and how much has been put into it and above all, it has led to a short-sighted approach to development in the country,” he said.
Prof Agyeman-Duah said this on Saturday during a television discussion on the topic, “Getting it right after 30 years. My case for Constitutional Review”.
He noted that political party organisation and electoral politics in Ghana had been heavily monetised, with highest bidder often winning elections.
The Professor said the cost of participation and embedded corruption in party politics had excluded many individuals with promise, whether young or old.
He said another key area where party democracy in Ghana seemed to have flopped was with the actualisation of political participation.
Prof Agyeman-Duah said the 1992 Constitution invested so much power in the Executive at the expense of the other arms of Government, with presidential appointments becoming the means to creating jobs for party members and friends in Parliament.
Mr Oliver Barker-Vormawor, Legal Practitioner and Researcher, said the 1992 Constitution had failed to deliver to Ghanaians the blessings of prosperity and equal opportunity and rather allowed a select few to prosper at the expense of all.
He said the 1992 Constitution should not be considered as untouchable and called for a new Constitution to restore faith in the “project Ghana.”
The Lawyer said a new Constitution was a process, not an event and an opportunity to rebuild societies' beliefs and desires for change from the ground up.
“The Constitution of the nation is much more than a simple road traffic law. It carries with it the hopes and aspirations of the people and when they have lost belief and hope, when they are no longer compelled by the moral authority of that document, the Constitution has lost its rhythm there.”
“It will forever mean very little to the Executive that swears an oath to uphold it and to the Judiciary that is called upon to interpret it, yet undermines it at every opportunity. When we call for a new Constitution, we are calling for more than the gathering of a few lawyers to produce for us another document without a soul but a document of our own making,” he said.