body-container-line-1

Post Supreme Court Decision

Analysis of risk and other matters
Feature Article Post Supreme Court Decision
JUL 21, 2013 LISTEN

Introduction
The frenzy and ballyhoo preceding the expected Supreme Court decision on the presidential election petition in Ghana has soured to new heights with many personages exercising their constitutional right to free speech and weighing in from different angles. Indeed, these are exciting times in Ghana's democratic journey and constitutional system of governance. There is no gainsaying that this petition has and would continue to test our collective commitment to the much touted maxim of 'rule of law', transparency, accountability and free speech which are positive values embedded in every system of democratic governance.

The palpable fear and apprehension in the air however seem to suggest a certain fragility and brittleness of our socio-political order which if unaddressed may very well become a self-fulfilling prophesy. Civil society response to this security risk has so far been commendable albeit deficient in terms analytical depth regarding the full inventory of probable causes of post-decision strife or protest that could degenerate into full blown chaos. The overwhelming commitment of the political elite, Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and Faith-Based Organizations (FBOs) to a conflict prevention approach that is tokenistic and symbolic in nature, is good and must be encouraged. But for all intents and purposes an exclusive reliance on this approach may in and of itself constitute an inherent risk. From a purely risk management perspective, preventive controls without clear and impartial mechanism for enforcing accountability is ineffective in addressing the risk for which control is set up in the first place. In this case, public commitments no matter how well intentioned, without emphasizing clearly, the possible legal consequences of anti-social behaviors such as causing strife or fear and panic etc., may achieve its full weight in political spectacle but might fail to preserve the peace and serenity that we all enjoy.

To present a full risk profile of the post supreme-court decision, it's imperative to review certain popular arguments that has been played out in the media, particularly the local FM stations in Accra.

THE ARGUMENTS
'We don't have a problem with the leaders, it's the followers' argued one Executive Director of an influential think-tank. The purpose of rehashing this argument is not to disparage the views expressed or stating our disagreement with it. It's important however, for analytical purposes, to understand clearly the potential outcome of policy responses formulated by concerned civic groups and supported by political parties. This is particularly important because we believe this argument misses a certain philosophical foundation. The leader-follower bond is a fundamental truth that holds water in all facets of human experience. This fact is however nebulous in the political realm since power is wielded by both the 'leader' through resources, enforcement authority etc., and by the follower through the thumb (electoral power). By and large, grass root behavior is shape by the top hierarchy.

This understanding (assumption) forms the basis of our belief that policy proposals to manage the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision ought to fully place the main political actors at the centre and not the other way round.

Then comes the spokesperson for the 'Concerned Clergymen' of Ghana, who, in an interview with CITI 97.3 FM on July 18, 2013 argued, that all the fuss being made about possible conflict was misplaced and that [essentially] the National Peace Summit being organized by Institute of Democratic Governance was much ado about nothing. Paradoxically, the 'Concerned Clergymen' seem not so concerned about the strategic necessity for scenario planning and to orient people towards a non-violent expression of shock as a result of the impending decision.

The defect in this view and approach is the lack of accounting for other regional experiences that may have different set of matrices but essentially boils down to the interconnected principle of problem, intervention and change. Change, as willed by man does not happen in the manner willed, if clear interventions are not formulated to address a problem. Many secular examples could be used for illustration purposes but since this is an argument from a representative of the Christian clergy, it is fitting to use one from the Bible. Two key historical events, inter alia, that changed the destiny of the Hebrew race are the Babylonian captivity during Jeremiah the prophet's era and the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Regarding the latter, Jesus upon his triumphal entry into Jerusalem makes certain revealing statements as recorded in Luke 19: 41-44 (NIV).

'As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it, and said, if you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace-¬¬ but now it is hidden from your eyes. The days would come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. They would dash you to the ground, you and the children within our walls. They will not leave one stone on another, BECAUSE YOU DID NOT RECOGNIZE THE TIME OF GOD'S COMING TO YOU'.

In the case of the Babylonian captivity, the prophet Jeremiah was sent to warn the rebellious king Johoiakim, son of Josiah, against the sins of idolatry. In all these instances, calamity could have been avoided, arguably, through compliance and alignment with the divine.

I admit that these are murky waters, especially using scriptural illustrations for secular arguments that may have differences in context and geo-political backgrounds. But the principle is very instructive; no change without intervention. Leaving things the way they are is to disregard the call by certain (other) clergymen, ironically, to pray in other to avoid any undesired outcome. So, to the 'Concerned Clergymen', who argue that the noises may be overblown, I say, better ugly noise than severed limbs.

SECURITY RISKS
Plaintiffs and Respondents
Gleaning from the intensity of the court case, where parties are not ready to cede an inch of space to the other, its stands to reason that all parties recognize the value and importance of what is at stake. Given this kerosene context, any attempt by the 'victorious' party to taunt and celebrate the outcome may very well be the match stick to trigger a conflagration.

Party Communicators and Media Commentators
The famous Atubiga saga of criminal contempt where a political party faithful made inflammable statements ending him in prison for three days sobered the airwaves and sterilized it of unsavoury commentary. Following that incident, one can argue that decorum and sanity (relatively) characterizes political discussions on radio. Notwithstanding, the risk of irresponsible commentary is a clear and present one that needs to be addressed through various means be it administrative by methods of suasion.

The Media
There are some who argue that the media only reflects the undercurrents of social dialogue and trends. Such argument no doubt views the media as a passive conduit of social occurrence be it serendipity or calamity, without emphasizing the broader responsibility of ensuring that a certain desired order or value system is preserved for the popular good. Moderators of political discourse who may be driven by this assumption poses tremendous risk due to the passive approach to their gate-keeping role.

National Security Apparatus
The perceived partiality of state apparatus as agents of persecution of political opposition is also another risk element that must be addressed. Indeed, some argue that should Atubiga have been a member of an opposition political party, state security agents would have 'invited' him for discussion. This perceived bias, real or apparent contributes to the distrust that has polluted the political discourse in our current democratic endeavor.

RECOMMNDATIONS
The following risk management responses are recommended for consideration by policy handlers:

1) Irrespective of which direction the decision goes, the Electoral Commission must demonstrate humility in accepting that operational inconsistencies of the 2012 election is partly attributable to insufficient management controls and not because the EC is 'a human institution'. Clear proposals for institutional reforms, informed by multi-stakeholder consultations must follow without undue delay. We believe this would (a) pacify the 'loosing' side and (b) signal to all and sundry about Ghana's determination to consolidate its democratic credentials.

2) Key groups such as National Media Commission and Ghana Journalist Association must fashion more effective accountability mechanisms that achieves balance between the rights to free expression and responsible journalism.

3) Political parties must go beyond ethical codes of conduct to explore administrative means of exacting punishments for ethical breaches without fear or favor. There is institutional credibility in the perception of political parties disciplining their own instead of the usual cross-party persecutions.

4) The National Security apparatus must be seen to be impartial in their discharge of their constitutional obligations. The security success of the 2012 election is a good model to be replicated.

CONCLUSION
Political risk is a primary barometer of the global business environment. Where uncertainty prevails, capital flight is assured with all its untoward outcomes for the economy. Given the already difficult economic conditions prevailing in the country, the composite political risk as presented in this paper constitutes a threat and an opportunity, shrouded in one mold, lurching at an ominous judicial curve on this long road of democracy and justice. Our security, our peace, our destiny lies before us to choose. May God guide the court and may wisdom guide our choices. Yen ara ye asase ni!!

The writer is the Executive Director of Freedom Centre for Business and Public, a business advocacy outfit dedicated to creating a competitive private sector through sound policy. Kindly send comments or feedback to [email protected]. For further info please visit our blog www.freedomcentreghana.com

body-container-line