body-container-line-1

Gitmo 2 Debate, A Case Of Society's Pettiness And Political Immaturity!

Feature Article Gitmo 2 Debate, A Case Of Society's Pettiness And Political Immaturity!
JUN 25, 2017 LISTEN

I cannot completely disambiguate the extent to which political manoeuvring can go at specific point of time. But when it comes some African countries' politics and for that matter that of Ghana, the concept of dirty or the gutter politics prevails.

The glosses that surround two Guantánamo ( Gitmo ) ex-detainees currently being hosted by Ghana are not that far-fetched. What would have otherwise been national gesture of goodwill and pride has become instead a source of fear, panic and of politically accentuated debate on the mainstream and social medias.

In his determination to close Guantánamo Bay detention camp, the former president of United States of America, Barrack Obama ( 2009-2017 ) courted several countries. In total, 59 countries with Afgabistan, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan hosting the largest numbers of detainees of 203, 139 and 63 respectively. Countries in Europe with reasonable cause to be alarmed, France, Spain, ltaly, Switzerland, Germany, Denmark with 9, 5, 3, 3, 3 and 1 respectively. On our continent we have Senegal 2, Libya 2, Cape Verde 2 Egypt 1, Uganda 1. We are even told US, Canada and Australia have their share of the detainees too. While Russia 7 and 6 for a "third world" country Uruguay is just one more example.

I must admit that the phenomenon of Gitmo detainees is not mandatory national responsibility. Which in other words means that Ghana didn't literally arrested and detained that number of people believed to have ties with Al Qaeda. But the decision to admit 2 of them was completely voluntary. It happened under the auspices of Mahama led NDC government. And if US ambassador to Ghana's statement to effect that then-opposition leader Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo together with some stakeholders were duly and promptly consulted prior to the arrival of Gitmo detainees. And if now-president Nana Addo obliged and gave his blessings, that would have done it. It would have been decision taken as a result national consensus. I cannot fathom the fear, panic above all the resultant nationwide raging debate ever since. Is very whelming!

Other nations that willingly took the decision to host the detainees are also democratic countries. They do have internal institutions and political organizations with variant ideological suasions. But what makes them different from us is that they didn't engender fear, panic and irrelevant national debate either on the part of political players or opinion leaders. In Germany, Spain and even France which is terrorist target, hosting of Gitmo inmates is just one of such inter/national commitments and obligations. Am not against citizen constitutional provision of freedom of expression. The adverse effect of prolonged and protracted debate of matters relating Gitmo 2 ex-inmates could be pretty damning for our relation with international communities

Judging from wisdom of "the devil you know is better than the angel you don't know." And the fact Gitmo duo conducted themselves accordingly ever since: One will be tempted to question the rationale behind the brouhaha that surrounds their presence Especially when the tv panalist argued that American lawmakers rejected the proposal by Obama Administration to send Gitmo detainees to America because the conditions they were previously held were unconstitutional. But what on earth makes a governance of country and its powers, are there no decisions that can be taken without first going through parliament? Or rather if all these countries had for one reason or the other refused to admit the Gitmo inmates, what United States would have done? In reference to above adage, who could ever imagine that deadly Nigerian kidnapping kingpin operating on our soil? The fact he was successful in obtaining our passports for himself and family makes Gitmo 2 debate exaggeration

If that isn't enough to answer the question, we are being told that US is currently hosting 2 Gitmo ex-detainees. Per my assumption why US is unwilling to embrace the detained radical muslims categorized according to the level of risk; has nothing to do with constitutionality than the direct threat they pose to the Americans. This is not to suggest that the Gitmo detainees aren't a threat to Ghana for that all other countries that have admitted them. The threat is slim compare to US. Moreover not long ago, Joaquim Guzman, El Chapo, the notorious Mexican drug baron was handed over to US authorities. Bear in mind that, El Chapo was being held without trial just like the detainees!

On the hand if Supreme Court ruling is anything to go by: If not contradictory, Supreme Court has apparently legitimize the deal reached by the former Mahama administration with US counterpart. One thing is Supreme Court ruled to declare the presence of Gitmo 2 as unconstitutional and their immediate repatriation, another is the supposed unconstitutionality can be constitutionalized in parliament. What kind of judgement is this? In any case if we have to analyze Supreme Court's verdict carefully, we will conclude that the presence of Gitmo 2 ex-detainees are within the legal limit. Otherwise we wouldn't be able to legalize their status as marked the ruling

Finally, the earlier we stopped the debating Gitmo 2 issues the better psychological effect on the society, Gitmo 2 and our image before international communities. That is say, NDC should help the current government to find permanent solution to the legality of Gitmo 2 in other to put rest to the case

And vale ya with the culture of 'majoring in minor and minoring in major '

Agobodzo, Richard
You can contact me through
[email protected]
or www.facebook.com/Agobodzo Richard

body-container-line