For anyone who has monitored and seen almost every election in the Fourth Republic, you will realize that the threat by a political party to prosecute officials of an existing government usually generates the loudest cheers. Like the ‘let the blood flow' chorus that characterizes the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council’s coup of 1979, it seems our people are more elated seeing their political opponents go through some uneasiness, even if there is no legal basis for those threats.

Unfortunately, even after 3 decades of maintaining a stable democratic dispensation, these threats and the effects they have on people, have still stayed in our politics. In this piece, I delve into political prosecutions, and I have intentionally used the term, persecution, in some instances, as the difference is blurred.

Ghana’s Notable Rhetoric of Political Prosecutions:

This approach has characterized a lot of political communications, especially the ones that seem to have succeeded. We have applauded persons who have always led the call for the prosecution, if not the persecution, of their political opponents, as though those persons have what it takes to prosecute people independent of the courts and invocation of law. Citing cases in our recent history, it is obvious that in the lead-up to the 2009 elections, threats of political prosecution were a clarion call.

The National Democratic Congress NDC, having made a myriad of allegations against officials of the exiting New Patriotic Party, vowed to prosecute those they considered corrupt. However, once they checked in, it was apparent that they did not have any concrete evidence to execute the same. Their failure to secure conviction was so glaring that the Chairman of the Party at the time, Dr. Kwabena Adjei was reported as saying controversially that "there are many ways to kill the cat," a statement which drew massive criticism.

The situation was no different with the ruling New Patriotic Party, whose political fortunes in 2016 were bolstered by similar threats. Today, most of their party fanatics remain disappointed that most of these threats have never seen the light of the day. What happened? The reality was that they did not have such powers. The recent controversial Ambulance case against the Minority Leader, Dr. Ato Forson, which was punctuated by an Appeal Court, No case verdict, should get all political actors to revise their notes.

Court of Public Opinion:

Everywhere in the world of politics, the court of public opinion appears to take
precedence over the court of competent jurisdiction. Politicians try to appeal to populist sentiments using the Court of Public Opinion, where people are pronounced guilty before they have any opportunity to prove their innocence. One other interesting point about this court is that the burden of proof is on the accused rather than the prosecutor.

However, in the courts of law, the contrary is the case. Truly anyone who has followed the politics of Ghana is not new to this court, which is staged during political rallies, radio commentaries and others. But as has been proven above, the approach and substance that proves successful in the court of public opinion do not find success in the courts of competent jurisdiction. The only thing this court does best is to achieve political expediency and nothing more, as has been the instances, I have cited above.

Effects of threats of political persecution:

Despite not having any meaningful benefits beyond politics, its effects can be damning, and I cite three:

Undermines Trust in the Judiciary: This practice adversely impacts judicial independence. The mere fact that a party can suggest that it will prosecute its political opponents creates an impression that the judiciary is always in the hands of the ruling party. This undermines trust in the judiciary.

Promotes Needless Acrimony: This approach does not foster smooth political transitions, a situation that compels the ruling parties to want to entrench their stay in power. In Ghana, we have not been new to the rancorous acrimony that has characterized political transitions.

Defamation: Sad still, through threats of political prosecutions, businesses and individuals have gone down. Even when the courts have acquitted them of any wrongdoing, the barrage of public disdain that the court in the process discredits these persons affects their public outlook and businesses.

Oral:

A group of young men and women from the opposition National Democratic Congress
have issued a notice to picket at the Ministry of Finance and other government
institution where they have heard of some corruption cases. According to reports, this group was formed in furtherance of the manifesto promise of the opposition party to prosecute corrupt officials of the ruling government, under a scheme that they have christened Operations Recover Asset Looted (ORAL). As an independent watcher, this young NDC fanatics group, which is led by the deputy youth organizer of the NDC, Osman Ayariga, appears not to have come to terms with the fact that their party has not won the elections yet.

Besides, what the leadership of the group does not know is that their decision to picket at government institutions will only serve to give foretaste to the rather acrimonious and disorderliness that will characterize their operations if indeed, their party secures victory in the impending elections. The decision of this group to commence operation, in the manner which they intend to, even before their party wins, is not just prejudicial and premature, but also exposes the clamor for internal relevance. For most undecided voters, some of these moves come off as disrespectful.

Truly the sheer sense of entitlement over the power of the people, ahead of the election, smacks of desperation on the part of the National Democratic Congress. Seemingly taking the mandate of the people for granted by acting in a way that suggests the NDC has already won the elections will be counterproductive.

Conclusion:

As a people, our democracy, after more than 3 decades, must outgrow some of these reckless political talks of prosecution of political opponents. Yes, these threats have always received the loudest applause and cheers from political fanatics, however, the case has always been different in courts, where it matters most. The days when whipping up populist sentiments for political expediency should be over.

Today, the challenges that face our people are so conspicuous that one does not even need a manifesto to make sense of them. While no one is against the prosecutions of persons whose actions might have proven costly to the nation, the view that those prosecutions could be done outside the remit of law and due process is both disrespectful and deceptive. Both the NDC and NPP have sounded these threats but have found it so hard to achieve the same, as the reality of judicial expediency has always taken hold on such matters. Maybe, it is time for our political parties to educate and re-orient their people about accountability, beyond persecution. The Peace Council must see this phenomenon as a new form of political violence and call out persons who engage in
same.