Perhaps, not many Ghanaians, especially politicians know that vote buying is an offence under the Criminal Code of 1960.

Section 240 of the code states that "A ... voter is guilty of corruption in respect of ... his vote, if he directly or indirectly agrees or offers his conduct as such … voter to be influenced by the gift, promise, or prospect of any valuable consideration to be received by such ... voter ... from any person whomsoever."

Whilst the above section talks about the voter who allows himself or herself to be unduly influenced by a politician, the subsequent section (section 241) focuses on the politician who influences the voter for his vote.

It states among other things

“ A person is guilty of corrupting a … voter in respect of … his vote, if he endeavours directly or indirectly to influence the conduct of such … voter in respect of … his/her vote, by the gift, promise, or prospect of any valuable consideration to be received by such … voter… from any person whomsoever.”

The law does not stop there. It includes even the fact that the crime would still have been committed if the voter was influenced at a time when he had not become such a voter. Section 242 clarifies matters further this way, “it is immaterial, for the purposes of section 240 or 241, that the person respecting whose conduct the endeavour, agreement or offer therein mentioned is made is not yet at the time of the making of such endeavour, agreement, or offer, such a … voter, if the endeavour, agreement, or offer is made in the expectation that he will or may become or act as such … voter.”

Whilst the criminal code is unambiguous as to the criminality of vote buying, the punishment ascribed to the offence is that of misdemeanor which hovers around a few months imprisonment; and legal experts say it is inadequate. The Acting Executive Director of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), Mr. Theophilus Codjoe believes the punishment for the offence was made so mild because the criminal code was formulated at a time when vote buying had not become such a big deal.

“It is about time we reviewed it to let people know that the act is a crime,” he said.

He further contends that aside the lack of the legal infrastructure needed to deal with such acts the fact that they are mostly complicated and difficult to investigate makes matters worse.

It is believed that in other jurisdictions, persons related to political office seekers or holders, otherwise known as politically exposed persons are all investigated to ensure that monies are not unduly transferred to them. A lot of cash is believed to be involved in the whole vote canvassing process, as most of the political aspirants are believed to carry with them large sums of monies. The SFO boss believes that the situation is so because “our economy is so cash based,” which implies that a law has to be in place to put restrictions on the amount of money an individual can carry around at any point in time.

As political parties go to congress to elect their flag bearers for the 2008 elections, some of the aspirants are alleged to be doling out monies to delegates and prospective delegates in expectation of their votes.

The ruling NPP’s camp in particular has come up for criticism in many quarters in respect of alleged vote buying and delegate hijacking by some of the presidential apsirants. The renowned satirist KSM has for instance joked on several occasions that if NPP delegates do not build houses this time round then they won’t build any for the rest of their lives. This is in apparent reference to the perception that most of these delegates take monies from virtually all the aspirants ostensibly to vote for them.

At a press briefing marking the UN Anti-Corruption Day, the Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition devoted a lot of time talking about the activities of politicians wanting to seek the mandate of the people by offering them money. The coalition contended that the practice is undemocratic and must be checked. “As people aspiring to lead the country, we call on all party leaders and aspirants to desist from such acts of bribery and influencing voters as it does not auger well for the nation’s democracy. Real political choice is necessary to secure representation for citizens in a democracy, but once that choice is limited to a few who can pay, we risk selling our franchise to the highest bidder. Citizens must also understand that if they take monies offered by politicians in exchange for their votes or other advantages, they lose their moral courage to hold politicians to account,”

Moreover, the coalition called for a mechanism to control internal political campaigns and reinforce the framework for external campaign financing. It also called for the amendment of the Political Parties Act so as to make it more transparent and widened in scope to include internal party campaigns.