Biometric Registration: The next step in Ghana’s Democratic Development . Some Troubling Questions for the Government.

By Richard Dombo Diedong LLB [Hons]

Brief Background:

Needless to say, Ghana has been the leading light in the West African sub-region since before the dawn of independence. Indeed our independence was, to be accurate, achieved in a bloodless manner – achieved more through ‘jaw jaw’ with the Colonialists than by force. Thus was established the abiding image that Ghanaians are a peace loving people, a democratic people. Other than President Nkrumah increasingly losing his respect for multiparty democracy which invited the 1966 coup d’etat, and subsequently other needless military interventions, including the Acheampong and Rawlings coups, our country has managed in 54 years of existence, four Republican Constitutions, the fourth of which we are currently enjoying.

Through the ballot box, the people of Ghana have successively chosen their preferred rulers and wish it to continue. Through the proliferation of independent broadcast media [FM radio stations, newspapers, internet and TV channels], the Ghana Broadcasting Corporation [GBC] house at Kanda in Accra which was the staging post for past coup de tats, lost that exclusivity, and thus a truly unfetted press was actualized. With further steps such as the abolition of the Criminal Libel Law under the NPP administration, true press freedom was entrenched in our political and civic systems. A critical press and political tolerance has released the freedom of expression genie from the bottle and no government can return it into the bottle. With the close outcome of the December 2008 general elections where the ruling NPP ceded power to the then opposition NDC with only a margin of 0.46% separating the two presidential candidates, Ghana truly entered into the rarefied arena of mature democracies rivaling that of the US and Great Britain. President Obama acknowledged this fact by making Ghana his first point of call in Africa following his inauguration as the president of the USA in 2009.

Biometrics and the next step in Ghana’s democratic journey:

The 2008 general elections in Ghana, although cleared by foreign monitoring agencies as free and fair, none-the-less was fraught with claims and counter claims of numerous electoral malpractices in particular sections of the country notably the Volta Region and the Ashanti Region, depending on which political colors you wear. Understandably, when the NDC government heeded the urgings of the opposition NPP and PNC parties to introduce a biometric system of registration as a prelude to a fully merged biometric voting system in subsequent elections, the omens were good that Ghana was again poised to add that bit more to its reputation for advancing its democratic credentials.

Tangible steps towards this realization started when an advert appeared in the UKTI [United Kingdom Trade Institute] news letter, as follows: “Wednesday, 16 Feb 2011 Ghana - Biometric Technology for Voter Register Opportunity to supply and install biometric technology to replace existing voter register in Ghana. Tender deadline: 09/03/2011”

This advert gives the criteria and other essentials interested bidders/companies should possess in order to qualify.

Other tangible steps in the biometric endeavor include the government allocating GHC50 million initially, and ultimately $85million for the biometric registration exercise. In furtherance of this, the opposition NPP and PNC have called upon the Inter Parliamentary Advisory Committee [IPAC] to meet as soon as possible so as to reach a consensus from all stake holders in the way forward in this biometric enterprise.

In as much as there are these outwardly stated intentions to introduce a biometric system into Ghana’s electoral system and consequently ensure a fraud free set of future elections, regrettably there are equally disturbing questions that need answering; issues that need resolving, and actions that present conflict of interest situations, and need highlighting.

Searching Questions: i] As I write this piece, the IPAC is yet to heed the call by the NPP and PNC parties to convene quickly to resolve budding issues to forestall any suspicions and mistrust of the process. After all 2012 is not a distant future from now. The question is, why this unwarranted delay in convening an IPAC meeting? Is there a credible connection between David Azey Adeenze Kanda’s role as Deputy Chairman of the Electoral Commission responsible for Electoral Operations and his perceived sympathies towards the ruling NDC? Consider the close connection to the NDC where Kanda’s brother, Ken Kanda, has recently been appointed by the NDC government as Ghana’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations! Can any fair minded individual see what I am seeing and arrive at conclusions as I have? If The Deputy Electoral Commissioner with oversight for electoral operations, choose to ignore legitimate calls by opposition party representatives to convene an IPAC meeting to confer on this most important issue of biometric registration, what other inference or conclusion can one arrive at other than that Kanga does not necessarily see any opposition input on this matter as mutually beneficial to the NDC party and government? Is David Kanda beholden to Pres. Mills and his NDC for appointing his brother, Ken Kanda to the UN? Well, based on David’s inexplicable actions or inactions in relation to opposition party calls, dear reader, be the judge. Thanks. Whilst pondering your obvious decision, please consider this quote from an interview granted by Ken Kanda in the US following his appointment to the UN “Granting his first interview to AMIP News on his very first day at work, Ambassador Ken Kanda expressed optimism about the presidency and the state of Ghana’s democracy and economy. “…We are in the process of getting to the Promised Land. The main goal now is to improve the living standards of the people, lifting people out of the quagmire of poverty,” using the words of President Atta Mills. “The President has declared 2011 a year of action, meaning we will see visible signs of improvement in the form of infrastructure– schools, hospitals, roads, etc.”

Are these the words of a seasoned career diplomat, or a political acolyte? Again dear reader, you be the judge. Any wonder the opposition have real concerns that David Kanda is strategically located in the Electoral Commission’s offices? This is no situation of crying wolf. This is real angst, as exemplified by David Kanda’s actions or inactions thus far.

Leading on from this obvious conflict of interest issue involving the Deputy EC, Kanda, are other troubling questions, including: ii] How was the decision reached on the preferred bidder to supply the biometric equipment?

iii] Of the types of biometric equipment available on the market, what informed government’s choice of the type chosen for Ghana? Indeed, was it the EC’s or the government’s prerogative in this choice? iv] Is the registration process starting from scratch, or is it utilizing available databases such as those held at the Passport, DVLA, NHIS offices? If not, why not? I would have thought that cost and time imperatives would have dictated that any such registration would utilize existing databases; v] Specifically on the type of machine chosen, has it been stress tested for accuracy, that is, minimizing false acceptance and ensuring it would be robust and fit enough for purpose?

vi] Will the EC and the government please confirm or deny that the machine chosen does not have a verification capability which essentially makes a mockery of the whole investment and endeavor? This is a critical question because the whole purpose of a biometric register is to lock out duplicity, impersonation and multiple voting potential for those so desirous. It cannot be stressed enough that if the government in collaboration with the EC controversially go ahead with half measures, that is to say, introduce equipment that is not fit for the purpose for which the whole biometric process was intended – prevent impersonation and multiple voting – then, as the Presidential candidate of the NPP, Nana Akufo Addo recently stated and backed by the NPP National Chairman, Jake Otanka Obetsebi Lamptey, the object would be missed and the investment money ought to be better utilized elsewhere! This will be the case where it is true that the equipment purchased does not have a verification capability. What is the point in having a biometric register which on election day cannot confirm a name on the register with the person presenting himself at a polling station as the named person to vote? Of what use is the system then? How can the government justify using the country’s scarce foreign exchange in this wasteful manner? Hard up tax paying Ghanaians deserve better. Ghanaians as a whole deserve better.

Whilst pondering over and awaiting answers to the questions already posed, it is pertinent to tackle another troublesome question in relation to this biometric registration issue.

vii] Simply put, why has the government in its wisdom chosen the Ashanti Region as the sample area for this exercise? Without sticking one’s head into the sand, as most like to do, it has to be pointed out that this decision smacks of political expediency on the one hand, and flies in the face of logic where the tenets of sampling is concerned. In substantiation of these assertions, first of all the political expediency, it is as clear as daylight that an NDC administration choosing an NPP stronghold as a sample area needs no genius to decipher why. As with the fiasco of the 2010 population census, one also recalls the 2000 National Photo Identification exercise which also had the Ashanti region as the sample area. Guess what? The exercise ended with the Ashanti Region, meaning that whereas voters in that region voted with IDs, the Volta region, for example, voted without photo identification. If this is anything to go by, one could be excused in being skeptical that the Ashanti Region has again been chosen by another NDC administration as a sample area for the biometric registration exercise. Considering the intended merits of biometrics – to prevent fraudulent voting practices – if the stronghold of the NDC, the Volta Region, is not covered by the registration before time runs out for the 2012 elections, effectively, the administration would be open to justified criticisms of emasculating the NPP whilst benefiting from possible fraudulent votes in the Volta Region. Any fair minded government would be at pains to avoid this occurrence so as to appear honorable, and I pray President Mills would direct this to be so.

On the issue of the sample area itself, it is illogical and for that matter lends further credence to the previous point, to choose the largest region – Ashanti – for sampling. The Wikipedia defines a sample size as such: “Sample size determination is the act of choosing the number of observations to include in a statistical sample. The sample size is an important feature of any empirical study in which the goal is to make inferences about a population from a sample. In practice, the sample size used in a study is determined based on the expense of data collection, and the need to have sufficient statistical power.” In essence therefore, other than for the political reason aforementioned, cost and time imperatives dictate that a smaller [Upper West] to medium size [Volta] region ought to be considered rather than the largest region. This would ensure a speedier completion and quicker examination of the sample results prior to wider implementation. The thrust of my argument is that for both political transparency, as well as time and cost implications, the Ashanti region ought not to be the chosen sample region for the biometric registration exercise.

Could the government, the EC, IEA, and IPAC please heed the call made in this article, so as to ensure this foray into the next level of our democratic development, is cost effective, transparent, universally acceptable and ultimately worthwhile. Simply put, ‘a thing worth doing, is worth doing well’; go for the full biometric package, or else leave the status quo alone. I also call upon these same bodies and agencies to seriously consider the questions and challenges raised by the think tank group IMANI on the issue of the infrastructure, test regime and other security measures relating to biometrics. To the rest of the Ghanaian population, my call is for you to wake up and be alert to any recurrence of a ‘stolen verdict’ situation as witnessed in 1996. Your action or inaction will either liberate you or condemn you to a regime you may not have consciously, freely and democratically voted for. A flawed biometric registration system without a verification potential, coupled with the EC office inhabited by a not so neutral 2-IC, is a recipe for this outcome and must be resisted.

Long live Ghana Long live our Democracy

Authored by Richard Dombo Diedong LLB (Hons)