Mama Logo insists on living up to political ethics

In today's fast moving political world; where all kinds of mafia tactics, rough play, day light robbery, greed and scandals reign supreme; a political party's image and reputation are perhaps two of the most important assets any serious political group may possess. Creating ‘just the right image’ in the public's eye is essential for the survival of any venture and explains why many political institutions jealously guard against the abuse and misuse of their emblem and other symbols. The bottomline has to do with ethics.

Ethics is a branch of philosophical activity which studies fundamental or foundational principles of society, morality, truth and law. In other words, it is the science of morals that studies morality through the critical examination of right and wrong in human action. This encompasses various concepts and traditions which provide individual lenses through which value-laden questions can be posed and considered. And this involves systematizing, recommending, and defending concepts of right and wrong behaviour

The object of controversy, NDC emblem

As you may be aware, Nana Konadu Agyemang Rawlings, the former first lady of Ghana and challenger for nomination of the ruling National Democratic Congress’s (NDC) standard-bearer position holds the copyright to the political party logo being used by the ruling party as its registered political party symbol and known as the ‘akatamanso’ (umbrella). Her intellectual property rights in the said symbol were duly registered on the 12th of April 2010 under the Copyright Act (2005), Act 690. In July 2011 at the Sunyani congress of the party, she highlighted her exclusive intellectual property interests and particularly warned the party against the infringement of her exclusive moral rights in the logo stipulated under sections 6(a) and (b) of the Act. Regrettably, those rights are still being infringed upon by both party leadership both in their public utterances and deeds and thereby denigrating the symbolic value of the logo. Nana believes that those values were embodied in the vision of the founder of the party and subsequently enshrined in the constitution of the party. The said denigration of the logo has manifested in disrespect for the founder, the disunity of the party, the neglect of its egalitarian values, lack of accountability by key party leaders to the membership of the party and consequently in the disaffection of the rank and file. Nana Konadu Rawlings therefore demands the immediate end to the continuous infringement and denigration of her exclusive intellectual property rights in the logo. That unless steps are taken by the party to that effect, she will feel compelled to withdraw her permission for the use of the logo by the party.
There have been some counter claims by a couple of party members concerning who really designed the emblem but it might seem that the question of the legal owner is currently not in doubt. All such claims made have been limited to designing and that does not automatically translate into intellectual right because the claimants from their own narration were apparently commissioned or contracted in one way or the other by the Rawlingses to design if it ever happened at all. What is not so clear is what a court of competent jurisdiction would say accounting into account the question of balance of convenience regarding withdrawal of Nana Knoadu Agyemang Rawlings and its consequences on the business and elections fortunes of the NDC considering the fact that the party has barely six months to go to the polls.

Many of the above assertions are direct quotations from a letter the former first lady caused to be sent to the NDC. From an observer’s point of view, the assigned reasons are all considered just immediate causes (i.e. convenient way to hit back at the party leadership over perceived grievances) arising from the real remote causes bottled up for sometime now. The suspicion of many is that she is yet to recover from shock of the attempts by the current party leadership to relegate her and her founder husband to nothingness as contained in the recent wikileaks expose and manifested at the July 2011 Sunyani congress. It is also strongly believed that Nana Konadu intends to contest the 2012 elections in whatever capacity in an attempt to cause the defeat of the sitting president John Evans Atta Mills to pave the way for her family and loyal supporters to reclaim the soul of the party. The point some political connoisseurs in Ghana highlight is that the struggle over the NDC emblem buttresses this view. Some have even hinted already that the former first couple intend to form a new party to be called National Democratic Party (NDP) and may be outdoored on June 4, 2012 when they mark the 33^rd anniversary of the coup d’état that eventually gave birth to NDC in 1992. In fact a few have even whispered that her antics may be a trump card she is using to get her family’s spokesperson, Mr. Kofi Adamu Adams reinstated to his position as the Deputy General Secretary in charge of Administration and Finance. Mr. Adam, whom party leadership consider as a mole, has been suspended for 90-days over an alleged telephone conversation he is purported to have had with the Executive Director of think tank, Danquah Institute, Mr. Gabby Okyere-Darko. He has denied the content of the conversation.

And yet others feel that Nana Konadu intends to use the NDC logo to campaign as an independent candidate while still retaining her membership of the party. According to those of this school of thought, the evidence is all too clear. They cite two recent incidents to support their argument. Nana Konadu was physically prevented from addressing party supporters at the Town Hall in Cape Coast where she had gone to thank delegates who supported and voted for her. The thugs at the centre of this particular scene were allegedly hired by the Central Regional Minister, Ama Benyiwaa-Doe and Director of Communication, Bernard Allotey-Jacobs. A poster of Nana Konadu seen all over the country portraying her as presidential candidate for 2012 Presidential Election angered the party leadership who caused it to be destroyed claiming it was an abuse and illegal use of the party logo. With this in mind, it appears pretty logical that she has to flex her muscle to avert party leadership’s attention to the fact that the logo is just being rented out to the party on her permission for which permission she will not hesitate to withdraw as indicated in her letter to the party leadership.

Irrespective of where one stands or feels, the battle lines are clearly drawn. Something unprecedented will surely occur before the presidential poll this year. Regrettably, it is the grass that suffers when two gargantuan power players clash, in this case governance and the welfare of the innocent voter. Regarding the real intentions and underlying causes of the impending conflict, it is very difficult to uncover presently except to wait patiently and witness it play out to its logical conclusion. What any of us is free to do though is to keep on exercising out mental faculties by conjecturing the probable outcome. For now, all we can say is that Mama Logo is insisting that the NDC keep to the narrow path. The practice of political party game can present unique and challenging ethical issues. At the same time, protecting integrity and public trust are fundamental to a party’s role and reputation. Successful party politicking hinges on ethics of politicians’ ability to engage in ethical reasoning as political values is growing in demand, in responsibility, and in importance. Therefore, attention to astute and rigorous ethical use of political power is essential not only for individual politicians but also for a political party’s effectiveness in achieving long-term success and fulfilling the desires and needs of the people. For this reason, the NDC must keep the narrow path according to Mama Logo else its name and meaning will soon become 'Akataebusuafoɔso' instead of 'akatamanso'.