The President’s hydra-headed approach to resolving party militialism through legislation and voluntary disbandment creates more questions than answers.
In a recent missive addressed to the Chairman of the NDC, Samuel Ofosu-Ampofo, the President, Nana Addo Dankwah Akufo-Addo, while directing the Minister for Justice and Attorney General to outlaw party militialism, he also urged the NDC and NPP [in same letter] to work towards voluntary disbandment.
“Since the constitutional responsibility of maintaining law and order in our country is that of the Executive, i.e. the President of the Republic, 1 have, in line with my pronouncement to Parliament during the Message on the State of the Nation on 21' February, 2019, instructed the Attorney General, without prejudice to the outcome of the engagement, if any, between the NPP and NDC, to prepare and submit to Parliament, as soon as possible, specific legislation to deal with the phenomenon of vigilantism, and provide appropriate sanctions against its occurrence,” he wrote.
The unanswered question is since the vigilantism is going to be outlawed [assuming it is not already illegal]; of what effect will be the outcome of the voluntary disbandment meeting in law? For instance, if the meeting decides against giving up the militias, will the president use the new law to compel them against their wish?
Granted the above, why can’t the president call off the meeting of the parties and just pass the law, since ultimately the law supersedes any consensus at a political meeting?
While the query appears banal, it is the cost to the taxpayer which gives relevance to it.
In recent research published by Parliament, it found that the cost of implementation of the Right to Information (RTI) Bill into law will cost the government some ¢750 million over the next five years.
Assuming time, human resource, and implementation cost were ignored, how much will it cost government financially to outlaw vigilantism?
And how much will it cost the government to facilitate a meeting, involving the political parties, civil societies, security agencies, the media, and international bodies as proposed by the NDC and accepted by the NPP?
For instance, the cost of the venue, the cost of meals and refreshment, transportation of attendees, fees for the expert facilitators, assuming the process may last for only a month?
Already the public is yet to be apprised of the cost of the Emile Short Commission of Inquiry that was also aimed at resolving the same menace, for instance, how much salary was paid the commissioners, tool their office and the experts they fell on?
With the NDC now calling for a national dialogue on the subject to include all forms of societal violence including chieftaincy disputes, student unrest, police-civilian conflict and mineral conflict, the cost is expected to increase given that the stakeholders and the problem are bigger than earlier thought of.
“Organised violence has become prevalent not only in partisan politics (inter and intra- party) but in land and natural resources disputes, chieftaincy disputes, disputes within academic institutions, and even disputes within religious bodies.
“We can also not exclude the problem of unjustified violence by state agencies such as the Ghana Police Service. It is this larger and intensifying violent culture that threatens our constitutional Republic and not just partisan political violence,” the NDC National Chairman wrote in his third letter addressed to the President
He added “We hope that as the first Citizen you will use your position to support and shape this broad national dialogue.
The NDC has also questioned the need for new legislation, given that the existing laws empower the president sufficiently to combat the existing threat to peace.
The Communication Director of the NDC has described the president’s move to legislate against vigilantism as “unfortunate.”
According to Sammy Gyamfi, while his party welcomes any effort aimed at combating party militarism, Nana Addo Dankwah Akufo Addo’s latest action merely betrays his commitment to disbanding political militia, which he said is “little.”
“We already have enough laws to deal with the exodus of vigilantism. Vigilantism is illegal,” he said on News Desk, a Joy News analysis programme on Friday.
The suggestion is that any cost incurred in passing a law to deal with a menace for which sufficient laws already exist will amount to causing financial law to the state.
Read Full Story
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Instagram
Google+
YouTube
LinkedIn
RSS