You are here: HomeNews2014 07 31Article 319138

Regional News of Thursday, 31 July 2014


Ghanaians trust CHRAJ than law courts – CDD report

According to a 2014 governance and peace poll by the Centre for Democratic Development (CDD), more Ghanaians trust the Commission on Human Rights and Administration Justice (CHRAJ) to deliver on their mandate than the law courts.

The study, done in conjunction with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and other partners, is aimed at supporting and tracking progress in the area of governance and peace in the country.

The study reveals that 53% of respondents trust in the law courts to deliver on their mandate, as compared to 64% for CHRAJ.

“Trust for the EC [Electoral Commission] was particularly low in the Eastern (44%) and Western (49%) regions; while trust for the law Courts and District Assemblies were low in the Upper East (56%) and Upper West (49%) and Western (58%), Central (58%), Greater Accra (58%) and Upper West (58%) regions respectively”; the study revealed.

However, a significant 53% of the respondents said they did not at all trust District Assemblies to deliver on their mandate.

Spokesperson for the Ghana Bar Association, Tony Forson, however believes the percentage of people who trust in CHRAJ, compared to those who trust in the courts are not significant.

“The striking thing about this report…is the contact with duty bearers. It is striking to know that 84% of the people [respondent] have no contact with their MP, 79% [have no contact] with their district assembly, 75% [have no contact] with their unit committee member…this is something that as a country we must stand up to”, he said.

He said it is imperative that people tasked to deliver key responsibilities in governance of the country know what citizens are thinking.

“It is frightening. Because how can people be responsible in [public] office. Because they know that the people themselves don’t care. How can the institution grow?” he asked Newsnight presenter, Evans Mensah, Wednesday.

Methodology for the study is as follows:

i.A multi-stage stratified sampling methodology based on Probability Proportionate to Population Size (PPPS) complemented with an area sampling approach was used because of some limitations in the 2010 population census data1;

ii. Purposive, stratified and random sampling techniques were used in selecting 40 out of the 216 local government areas;

iii. The 5 metropolitan areas that are also regional capitals were automatically included in the survey because of their cosmopolitan outlook;

iv. A stratified sampling procedure was used to select and distribute 30 districts across the 10 regions;

v. Simple random sampling approach was used to select specific Metropolitan, Municipal and District Assemblies (MMDAs) for each region according to its allocation;

vi. Similarly, in each selected MMDAs, 4 localities were randomly selected as survey centers;

vii.A listing exercise was carried and it yielded a total of 1399 potential respondents;

viii. Of this number, 1,273 were selected based on positive responses they offered to the key and lesser criteria including professed interest in public affairs and willingness to offer views on some selected institutions; all, 1,008 individuals out of the 1,273 potential respondents met both key and lesser criteria listed above; and

x.The remaining 265 potential respondents that met some, but not all key and lesser criteria, were kept as substitute respondents in case interviewers encountered difficulties getting access to any of the potential respondents in the primary sample.