By Kwame Okoampa-Ahoofe, Jr., Ph.D.
Garden City, New York
June 27, 2015
E-mail: [email protected]
I have already written several articles in the recent past on this subject, but maybe it is worth rehashing the same here, in order to drive home the point more forcefully, pointedly and instructively. The subject regards the fact that democracy is no respecter of personalities, but rather competent and positive-results getting personalities. And it is for this very reason that I couldn't agree more with KNUST political scientist Dr. Richard Amoako-Baah that the recent booting out of Parliament of Dr. Richard Anane, among a platoon of others, will not have any remarkable impact on the stature and quality of the proverbial august House (See "Parliament Won't Be Affected By Exit of Anane, Others - Amoako-Baah" Starrfmonline.com /Ghanaweb.com 6/15/15).
In the mid-1950s, when Dr. J. B. Danquah retired from the Legislative Assembly, having been defeated by his own nephew and political protege, Mr. Aaron Kofi Asante Ofori-Atta, the then-parliamentary Secretary, Mr. Ayensu, made a similar wistful observation about the tragic passing of an era. The reference back then, as now, regarded the inimitable depth and breadth of erudition and creative genius brought to bear on parliamentary debates by the putative Doyen of Gold Coast and Ghanaian Politics. There was much more truth to Mr. Ayensu's observation than that which attended the wake of the booting out of Parliament of Messrs. Anane, Osei and Addai-Nimoh.
For one, Danquah was an orator whose eloquence has yet to be either matched or bested by the present generation of parliamentarians. He was also a world-class constitutional scholar, which cannot be said of any of the 25, or so, incumbents of the main opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP) who lost their parliamentary seats in the latest NPP primaries. But even more significat ought to be highlighted the fact that these aforesaid parliamentarians lost their seats because their constituents deemed their performance in that august House to have been inexcusably substandard.
Unfortunately for those mournful about the termination of the tenures of MPs like Messrs. Richard Anane, Isaac Osei and Addai-Nimoh, retaining one's seat in our august National Assembly does not depend on any particular representative's debating skills; it is more about the development projects and/or funding for the same which an MP is able to bring to the people who elected him/her within the particular term for which that MP was elected to serve. To be certain, most of the 25 NPP-MPs booted out of Parliament had served long enough to need to give way to new blood.
Secondly, the very concept of parliamentary politics discourages creating permanent professional careers out of the same. To be certain, parliamentary representation/service was originally meant for those who had been extremely successful in their professions or areas of endeavor and wanted to be afforded the temporary opportunity to sacrificially return some of such success into the neighborhoods and communities that seminally nurtured their talents and skills and made them the successful and distinguished personalities that they had become.
The present, Fourth-Republican Ghanaian parliament cannot be genuinely said to foster a yeomanly sense of altruism and sacrifice. Rather, our present-day Parliament has become an avenue for the shameless acquisition of quick money and property, on the part of our representatives, while doing very little for the socioeconomic and cultural uplift of the people who elected these parliamentarians. The idea that longevity in the august House necessarily produces worthwhile experience, clearly does not seem to have been borne out of the reality of the lives of the delegates who booted out these "experienced" members of parliament.
At any rate, a parliament whose significance appears to be solely predicated on the rhetorical eloquence of its members, rather than the policymaking relevance of the same, may as well be legislated out of existence. I mean, who really wants a patent white elephant of a parliament? This trend of reasoning is regressive and has absolutely no place in a healthy postcolonial democracy.
Needless to say, "experience" would only matter where it could be proven to have invariably been translated into a dramatic uplift in the general quality-of-life of the constituents of these "experienced" MPs. It is also important to bear in mind that every one of these "experienced" MPs was at one time or another, not very long ago, a novice MP in the House. So why not opportunely step out of the way and give others with the requiste qualifications the same opportunity to represent their people and some worthwhile experience?
______________________________________________________________