A step in the right direction but...

Nothing has changed and nothing will change until the people use their innate power to bring about the desire changes. As Ghanaian voters ready themselves to choose a new set of leaders to shape the destiny of the population on December 7, 2012, people who have either personally put themselves up or have been nominated by political groups to contest, the question of free, fair and transparent process comes up. One of the main criterion for assessing and establishing a level playing field for all contenders in the political arena is the abuse of incumbency.  It is a referendum on the maturity of Ghana's democratic experiment.

The phrase abuse of incumbency refers to the use of government resources, not available to any other candidates, to aid an incumbent running for reelection. There are many ways political appointees in Ghana use their positions to further their election campaigns. This includes the use of government funds to pay campaign expenses, including travel costs, publications, salaries of campaign staff, sending campaign literature to constituents at government expense, as well as manipulating government statistics to make the government look better than the situation actually is. Acts of abuse of incumbency also include actual or threats to transfer or even fire non-supporters and coercing state and local leaders to support the incumbent government’s bid for re-election with state funds. Theoretically, the political process can check abuse of incumbency because challengers may make the unconstitutional acts a major campaign issue. Such an initiative to curb the practice is the ongoing 'naming and shaming' exercise by three civil society organisations. On Thursday August 16, 2012, the three non-partisan, non-profit civil empowerment organisations focused on the delivery of essential themes necessary for the creation of a national anti graft system reported the outcome of a survey in progress in this regard. The organisations are Ghana Integrity Initiative (GII), Centre for Democratic Development Ghana (CDD Ghana) and Ghana Anti Corruption Coalition (GACC). The activities under this project are aimed at promoting electoral integrity by engaging the electoral process in order to enhance election transparency, equality of opportunity, credibility, and peace. The Coalition seeks to use this monitoring project as an early warning mechanism where findings of electoral impropriety will be passed on to electoral stakeholders and the general public for prompt action. The overarching goal of this project is to initiate a set of interventions that will ensure that the 2012 elections are conducted in a peaceful and fair atmosphere. 

The survey covering the period of the months of May and June 2012 cited Ghana's ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC) over its penchant for wanton abuse of incumbency and power for electoral gain and at the expense of the Ghanaian tax payer. The survey found Brong Ahafo, Volta, Western, Eastern and Central Regions were predominately notorious for such abuse of incumbency. Political corruption was also ripe according to the survey findings. Political corruption is the misuse by government officials of their governmental powers for illegitimate (usually secret) private gain. It refers to behaviour by public officials, elected or appointed, which violates social or legal norms regarding what is or is not legitimate private gain at public expense. From civil/public officers to politicians, laws are circumvented to obtain riches and/or win and stay in power. Political corruption threatens democracy and good governance, undermining the legitimacy of government and democratic values. The findings, based on groups' monitoring report further faulted NDC appointees for claiming credit for projects undertaken with the District Assemblies Common Fund (DACF). As if this was not enough, NDC party officials in government were also cited for buying votes and using their positions to compel people to support the party.

To a number of Ghanaians who follow the political game in the country over the course of 20 years of the 4th Republic, this sounds like nothing new. What is new is the attempt by the group to document the much-talked about but often grossed over, hard evidence. According to the group, they have photos and other forms of electronic evidence to back their claims. As the group itself acknowledged, it does not have the constitutional mandate to take action against official abusing of incumbency, but by such public disclosure exposing the rot in the system and the culprit officials, a step in the right direction has been taken. This has many implications for the public to make their own judgment as well as providing ammunition for constitutionally mandated bodies such as the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) to act.

Democracy envisions rule by successive temporary majorities. The capacity to displace incumbents in favour of a representative of a recently coalesced majority is an essential attribute of the election system in a democratic republic. Consequently, both all ordinary Ghanaians including civil society groups and courts encompassing every constitutional entity charged with the responsibility of securing free, fair and transparent elections should be chary of efforts by NDC appointees to control the very electoral system which is the primary check on this power through abuse of incumbency. Few prospects are so antithetical to the notion of rule by the people as that of a temporary majority being NDC entrenching itself by cleverly manipulating the system through which Ghanaian voters, in theory, can register their dissatisfaction by choosing a new leadership on December 7 election day. Going forward, Ghana must legislate that all ruling party appointees who win primaries to contest an impending national election at any level  and at any time must be made to stand down their positions. Although this may in the short run deprive the nation of the services of some very competent appointees, the country stands to gain in the long that what is immoral and undesirable is removed and a sense of legitimacy bestowed on the very elected. We should never again allow ourselves to be taken for granted by citing similar wrong doings committed in the past as history can only offer us one valuable lesson; guiding us against repeating past errors. We should be bold and take the bull by the horn.