A dangerous scepter is being visited on the political landscape in Ghana by the NPP government. It is the ugly scepter of intolerance, which is resulting in the restriction of political space for the enjoyment of freedom and human rights. We are already witnessing the disturbing situation whereby the NPP government is hiding under the rule of law to systematically victimize its political opponents.

The introduction of a bill on anti-terrorism is meant to provide the NPP government with yet another power to get at political opponents and other ordinary people who may be exercising their inalienable right to free expression and basic human rights.In an era of global insecurity, it is necessary to introduce measures and laws meant to effectively combat the scourge of terrorism. However it becomes difficult to support a law, which by its design, is intended to restrict the rights of people in an unreasonable manner.

The introduction by the NPP government of an Anti-Terrorism Bill would have been welcome except that by the way in which they have defined terrorism, they have deliberately dragged in extraneous issues and have sought to criminalize persons or groups of persons who may have genuine reasons to protest against acts of injustice that they genuinely feel are being perpetrated against them. I am concerned that the definition of terrorism in the current bill is an attempt to blur the distinction between terrorism and the legitimate struggles of people facing an oppressive and vindictive government, or even those that may be fighting against foreign occupation.

The memorandum to the Anti-Terrorism Bill relies on the Un Security Council resolution 1373 for legitimacy. However, it is clear that UN Security Council by is clear that UN Security Council by its various resolutions restrict the definition of terrorism to: “Criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of person or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act.”

Public demonstration and protest marches cannot, in any genuine democracy, be classified as criminal acts even if in the process, they may occasionally result in unplanned skirmishes. When then does the NPP government include demonstrations including, stoppages by workers fighting for improved working conditions, as acts of terrorism? The answer is simple: it is part and parcel of the NPP attempt to narrow the social and political space for the exercise of democracy and human rights. If the NPP government’s definition of a demonstration is accepted, the December 2007 “Yewuo” demonstration in Accra, and the January 2008 “Blrukiti” demonstration in Tamale against economic hardships could be classified as acts of terrorism.

Looking at the NPP definition of terrorism, any genuine demonstration by the people of Dagbon to express their concerns about the government’s cover-up of the murder of the late Ya-Na and forty of this people could be classified as acts of terrorism. Again, if in the face of the overwhelming pollution of the rivers, streams and land areas in the Kenyasi No. 2 areas by a mining company, the people of Kenyasi NO. 2 should decide to embark on a public demonstration to protest against them, and if in the process an agent-provocateur throws a stone at a vehicle owned by the mining company, the people who organized the demonstration could be charged with terrorism and be imprisoned for 25 years.

Taking account of the fact that the NPP government and its supporters have always used the Preventive Detention Act as justification for the overthrown of the Kwame Nkrumah government in 1966, it smacks of hypocrisy and double standards that the same people should now be passing such a draconian law, which to all intents and purposes extends beyond the limits of the Preventive Detention Act.

It is an undeniable fact that as the days have gone by, the NPP government without any clue as to how to resolve community conflicts has become increasingly militarist in its approach to resolving disagreements. We are all witnesses to the gruesome manner in which Issa Mobila was allowed to be murdered by soldiers with o questions asked. We have seen how the NPP government allows police officers to shoot suspects (and sometimes innocent people) at will. More recently, we witnessed the unjustified murder of two people during a demonstration in Ashiaman. To top it all, we have heard of the actions by the soldiers at 37 Military Hospitals to force suspected traffic offenders to fondle the breasts of dead women or cuddle dead children. Some of the suspects have reported that they were locked up in the hospital’s mortuary deep-freezers along with dead bodies.

To proceed from these and add people who may be genuinely protesting against injustice, or attempting to draw public attention to issues, as criminals, is to say the least, taking us further along the slippery road to intolerance and tyranny. If we do not take care, we will be sleep-walking to a state of tyranny if the NPP government is allowed to criminalize the exercise of democratic rights. Unlike the period between the late 1950s and the mid 1960s when the forebears of the NPP (NLM and UP) were committing acts of terrorism in this country with their bomb throwing, all in pursuit of ethnic and political goals, this cannot be said about Ghana today.

Currently, what is happening in various parts of the country is that there are pockets of ethnic tension that need political commitment and effective strategies to resolve. Without the skill or political will to resolve these conflicts, the NPP is going to resort to “buga buga” methods which will enable them to throw people into prison for long periods without any commitment to resolving the core causes of those conflicts.