By: Patrick Tachie-Menson, Esquire,

Ghana has become a model of a free and open society in West Africa, if not of the whole of Africa. Ghana is currently referred to as a democratic country. The country has a constitution that adheres in principle to the ABC’s of democracy: an independent judiciary, the executive and the legislature. Ghana’s multi party system is worthy of emulation. The press is freer than ever. The Ghanaian system puts in display a meaningful representative government in epic proportions. The above positives cannot be traded for any other system of government: It is priceless.

Ghana’s present political path is enviable. It is safe to posit that Ghana has overcome the years of autocracy. However, Ghanaians must not be too giddy about this trend. During the successful allied invasion of Normandy in 1944, the British were overly confident and began to believe that the war was at end. To calm the nerves of the British, Winston Churchill asked the British not to view the successful invasion as the end nor the beginning of the end but rather to view it as the end of the beginning.

In the same vein, Ghanaians must consider their laudable gains as not the beginning of the end but the rather as the end of the beginning. The country is now up on its feet on a journey through the verdant pastures of democracy. Like anything of immeasurable value, the current political dispensation must be guarded closely and dearly. If not, the country’s present democracy may face the fate of Troy. Every new political system has its Trojan horse. There are some who seek to be at the epicenter of Ghana’s political system. They shove and heave in all directions with the sole aim of basking in the limelight. Their actions may be innocuous and they may be blind to the effects of their actions. However, their actions echo Cassandra like warnings.

We do not need a statistician to tally the number of times four particular actors have sought to dominate the political scene. Since 1992, the four actors have been Akuffo Addo, Atta Mills, and the Rawlings’ (Jerry and Konadu Agyeman-Rawlings). These old stalwarts are not political neophytes. Majority of them are seasoned politicians. They may have grandeur plans for the nation.

However, they are anachronisms. The Atta Mills/Akuffo Addo and Rawlings’ saga should be over by now. The parties need to tell these gerontocrats to step aside and to allow a new breed of fresh and pulsating brand of youthful and forward looking Ghanaians to run for party nomination. After all, the qualifying age for presidency under the constitution is set at 40 years. There are many qualified members within each political party that are sufficiently capable of running for and presiding over the nation.

With twenty years of democracy in the nation’s belt, the upcoming 2012 presidential elections could have presented Ghanaians with an opportunity to observe and experience an exciting debate between new and young but equally capable, dynamic and astute candidates who mean well for this nation. I trust such candidates can present their respective visions in an artful and well reasoned manner. A debate between them would involve a dueling combat of ideas to the finish.

The present line up of aspiring candidates does not have monopoly over these attributes. The responsibility lies with the parties to nominate younger visionaries as potential presidential candidates. A good politician is not necessarily an effective administrator. A good politician belongs to the higher echelons of his party-party i.e. party bosses. However, he/she may not be fit to be the country’s top administrator (president).

Electoral candidates must go through different stages: First, they must be political animals: politicians. In the years leading to their official campaign they must place their ear to the ground and listen to the grievances of the electorate. Then at the next stage which is the period of campaigning, they must echo the grievances of the electorate and communicate a plan to redress such grievance(s). Should they win, they should switch hats and immediately become administrators. As administrators, they must resort to listening and acting, and an application of prudence.

A look at the aspiring and suggested candidates makes one’s liver quiver.


Akuffo Addo, an old kahuna, has contested his party nomination on every occasion. He is a fixture in his party. With Akuffo Addo, his past crusade in persecutions will be his bane. His imprudence in an attempt to prosecute Tsatsu Tsikata and other members of the NDC was of epic proportions. He selectively ignored a basic principle of constitutional law: that there cannot be a retroactive application of laws that criminalize behavior. He is steeped in and enveloped by archaic battles. Akuffo Addo’s display of sympathy (if and only if it is sincere) for the flood victims is commendable. However, it is believable that he was political grandstanding on this issue. His recent visit and inspection of the devastated area was nothing more than a phot-op. He like the Rawlings’ love the game of politics but can’t play it. They are unable to cushion the impact of defeat.


Konadu Agyemang Rawlings is way past her political prime and cocooned in the old ways. She seems to have what is termed in commercial law as a ‘purchase money security interest’ in her party. I have no inkling as to what she intends to sell to the electorate other than a duplicate of her husband’s agenda. One cannot fathom how Konadu Agyemang Rawlings can display prudence in transactions involving the sale of government property or enterprise. It appears she has an albatross on her neck: her acquisition of Nsawam Cannery. The Nsawam Cannery deal raises a question as to whether she can distinguish situations involving conflicts of interest and whether she can prudently avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest in any governmental transactions. Her acquisition of the Nsawam cannery smacks at the minimum of quasi insider trading. As the wife of the then sitting president, she was privy to information and had greater access to the bidding process. Her power and influence was sufficient to allow her to muscle her way through the process.

As president, neither Akuffo Addo nor Agyemang Rawlings, whose husband has been calling for the prosecution (persecution) of members of Kuffuour’s administration, can fulfill the nation’s need for a president who will not occupy his/her time with seeking retribution.

President Atta Mills is caught in a conundrum. He is the aging incumbent. Reasonably, everyone expects him to seek re-election. He is a dichotomy. He is prudent and deliberative but boring and slow to act. This is not to suggest that he should be spunky and feisty. He just belongs to the old school through and through. He is more of the early twentieth century gentleman ensconced in a chair in his garden; a flask seated on a side table, pipe between the lips; newspaper in hand and brooding over events. (oops!) Notwithstanding, some suggest he is the most capable in the present show up. However, in his bid for reelection, he must take the administrator’s cap off and revert to the politician’s hat. How he achieves that is left to be seen. But should he win re-election, he will do well to surround himself with a young breed of administrators who are born, bred and bona fide outgrowths of the current world and of current 21st century dispensation.

No one is calling for a young and attractive knight in shining armor mounted on a white horse to become the next president. However, the present cycle of criminations and recriminations call for a new vanguard in all political parties. The present vanguard is engulfed in mudslinging. As a result, they have taken their eyes off the ball: the pressing needs of the 21st century world. Politics is not about what he said or she said. It should be about presentation and effectuation of ideas on how to stem stagnation and to place the country on a progressive track. Political contests should be about the ‘how’ of solutions and nothing more.

Political trends most often tend to outgrow politicians. Politicians caught in this outgrowth tend to resort to peccadillo. In Ghana, one typical example is the argument over the ex-president’s burnt private home .That issue needs to be solved in the normal process. As in all cases, loss of any private dwelling/home is pitiful and difficult to cope with. However, where the cause of the loss cannot be traced to state action or inaction, the source of compensation for such loss should not become the responsibility of the government. Whether the private dwelling/home was purchased by private funds or acquired as a state gratuity is of no consequence to any compensation in this case. In the absence of any promise by the state to indemnify, once a transfer of deed/ownership was made to the Rawlings’, the onus should be upon them to acquire insurance to insure against any hazards, negligence or accidents that may render the home inhabitable. It stands to reason that if they could acquire the cannery, they should be equally capable of raising funds to rebuild their home. End of story. It is time to quit asking ‘WHO KILLED COCKROBIN?’. Politicians should refrain from bickering over the cause of the fire or over the government’s role in compensating the Rawlings’.

It is also time to step beyond comparing present internal achievements to the past. Rather, it is time to have leaders who will compare the progress of our country to the progress of the outside world of today and tomorrow. To do so, we need young visionary and ebullient elected leaders. Such leaders are more likely to give the country a competitive edge in modern and futuristic times. They are better equipped to comprehend demands of the modern world better.

Why not borrow a page from Mandela’s play book? It is time to allow the new and younger generation of great persuasion to emerge. Old wine (old player) never fair well in new wine bottles (21st century world and dispensation). Ghanaians should seek to elect contemporary leaders who will lead in their prime. They should discard the old who seek to lead in their waning years? It is time to pry into the world of the JFK’s and Clinton’s; and to observe the current world of the Cameron’s, Medvedev’s, Obama’s and Sarkorzy’s. If not, Ghana will continue to elect leaders who are or will be way behind the times.