The Pendulum Of Police Responsibility And The Scare Of Vigilantism

Since the third wave of democratization of Africa, Ghana's democracy has been hailed as a model for the rest of Africa. The democratic credentials of the country have endeared it to many political scientists. Even so, the phenomenon of vigilantism casts a blur on the prospects of the country's democracy. Consequently, the general outcry of Ghanaians against the phenomenon is well placed. Prof. Henrietta Mensa-Bonsu's relabeling of the phenomenon as a militia that serves the interest of some political warlords has found acceptance and resonance with many Ghanaians. In his State of the Nation Address, the president of Ghana, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufu-Addo, called on the major two political parties, the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC) to have a dialogue that would consequently lead to the dissolution of their respective vigilante groups.

A cursory observation of the political tempo of Ghana is evident enough that most Ghanaians (including politicians) are fed up with the atrocities and mayhem vigilante groups – - Eastern Mambas, The Hawks, and Azorka Boys for NDC and Kandahar Boys, Bolga Bulldogs, Invisible Forces, and Delta Forces for the NPP - unleash on the state. The recent killing at the party office of the NDC in Kumasi, as a result of the invasion of the party's meeting by a vigilante group, and the low-intensity violence that characterized the parliamentary by-elections at Ayawaso West Wuogon have brought the trepidation most Ghanaians have about vigilantism to a head.

Much as there is no question about the need for the dissolution of all vigilante groups, my understanding is that we are tackling the fruit of a political system that feeds vigilantism, instead of addressing the root cause of vigilantism in Ghana's politics. In other words, I see the fight against vigilantism in Ghana as very superficial since it deals with the result of vigilantism rather than the causes of it. Our response is reactionary!

Following that, I argue that the nature of the security system, particularly the police – which is in charge of internal security – is one of the major reasons for the breeding of vigilante groups. The police institution is expected to protect the rules governing the social contract. In the social contract that the people of Ghana have with the political elites, it is the police who are responsible for ensuring that the rules governing the social contract are protected. The police protect the boundaries of the social contract. Any infractions on the rules are to necessitate arrest and prosecution. In view of this responsibility, the police are expected to exhibit a high level of professionalism. They are to execute their responsibility without fear or favor. They are also expected to aspire objectivity and ‘neutrality' in the execution of their responsibility. The pendulum of their responsibility is to respond to professionalism, rather than partisan politics.

Impliedly, any hint of biases and lack of objectivity in the police institution is likely going to destabilize the social order, since it threatens the social contract. The historical origin of the police in Ghana appears to cast a perpetual shadow of colonialism on the institution. History informs us that the police institution is one of the creations of the colonial establishment. The institution was established to protect the interest of the colonial regime. The kind of law and order that the police was to ensure was directed against quelling any nationalistic sentiments that were likely to make the colonial regime unpopular.

Thus, to ensure that the police live up to that expectation, individuals who were enlisted into the police were those who were aliens to areas where they were to serve. They were also mostly individuals who had had no connection with ‘western' education. Since the colonial police institution was filled with men who were strangers in areas where they served, their loyalty was unflinchingly directed towards the colonial regime. To consolidate we-feeling among the local rank officers, the colonial ad governor had a language policy that insisted that Hausa became their (lower rank officers) language. This was also because most of the policemen were of Hausa extract from Northern Nigeria. There were also policemen who were brought from Northern Ghana to serve in the south.

It is, therefore, true that the basic reason for the establishment of the police was to protect the interest of a European political elite. Because of this rationale for the establishment of the police, the colonial governor hardly enlisted the Asante – who were considered insubordinate – into the institution. Since the police were one of the legacies of colonialism that Ghana's nationalists inherited, the onus rested on them to reform the institution to reflect national aspirations. The police were to be reformed to make the institution professional.

Unfortunately, under the regime of dictators in Ghana, the police retained its colonial trappings. It continued to serve the interest of dictatorial regimes in the country. Since the Fourth Republic Constitution, which facilitated the re-democratization of Ghana in 1993, political leaders have devised new ways of perpetuating the logic of the colonialists in originating the institution. That the political elites appoint the head of the police – the Inspector General of Police – is a major fault line of the police institution. This fault line has inextricably tied the pendulum of the responsibility of the police to the political party in power. Thus, the police execute their responsibilities to reflect the colors of the political party in government. If it is the NPP that is in power, the police favor the NPP. If it is the NDC that is in power, the police serve the interest of the party.

This situation has created a sense of distrust these two major political parties have about the police. When both the NDC and the NPP are in opposition, they show a lack of trust for the police. More recently, these parties continue to show distrust for the police even when they are in power. But since the police are the primary guardians of the social contract, the NPP and the NDC when they are in opposition create their own security institution to protect their interest. Sometimes vigilante groups protect the interest of individuals in the party. This explains the origin of vigilante groups in Ghana. Vigilante groups, therefore, exist to protect the interest of individuals and political parties. They serve as an illegal parallel security institution in the country.

To overcome the challenge of vigilantism or militia, the police institution must have its independence. Politicians should stay clear of appointing the leadership of the police. The police must be allowed to regulate themselves. They must determine the leadership structures. The recruitment of men and women into the police system should be left to the police alone and must reflect national representation. To sum, the police must experience radical decolonization. My conviction is that until the police institution is purged of all unnecessary political influences, the fight against vigilantism will be like a thread mill race. We may succeed in disbanding the current vigilante groups we have, but until the police institution is reformed, politicians will devise new approaches to safeguarding their safety.

We need to allow the pendulum of the police to swing to wherever it pleases without any strings. Until that happens, we will continue to live in the shadow of the scare of vigilantism.

Satyagraha
Charles Prempeh ([email protected]), African University College of Communications, Accra