Individual Rights, Blood relations and Presidential Aspirations

« Prev

Comments (0)

Listen to Article

In a free democratic regime where individual right is supreme and paramount, it’s untenable, inconceivable and incongruous for people who profess and claim to be intellectuals and adherents of such principles and ideals to discredit an individual’s aspiration to the presidency of Ghana on the sheer basis that one’s blood relation would be the immediate past president.

Such argument is an affront to the 1992 Republican Constitution of Ghana, as enshrined in Chapter Five, Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms. Even in Chapter Six, the Constitution enjoins the State to protect the rights of individuals, under The Directive Principles of State Policy, Section 35 (4) ‘The State Shall cultivate among all Ghanaians respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms and the dignity of the human person’. It further states under Section 34 (5) that ‘ The State shall actively promote the integration of the peoples of Ghana and prohibit discrimination and prejudice on the grounds of place of origin, circumstances of birth, ethnic origin, gender or religion, creed or other beliefs’.

From the above articles in the Republican Constitution of Ghana, anybody who actively campaign against and discredit Addo Kufuor’s bid with letters like ‘…., Dr Addo Kufour is a Political Nuisance’, featured on www.ghanaweb.com on the 23rd July 2007, by a Ph.D. holder and a teacher of English and Journalism at a College in the U.S.A, clearly shows a mark of cynicism, ignorance, arrogance and an aberration of the fundamental law of Ghana, the 1992 Republican Constitution. Others also argue that Ghana is not a monarchy or dynasty, indeed, they are right and it explains why Addo Kufuor is contesting against about 19 other unofficial aspirants. If Ghana were to be a monarchy then, there would not be a contest and even Ata Mills of the NDC would not have conceived the idea of the presidency since Addo Kufuor by his privileged blood relationship with the president would have been the sole candidate as it pertains at Manhyia Palace, Oforipanin fie and Buckingham Palace.

Ghanaians must recall with pride and at all times endeavor to protect the fundamental rights of the individual as it’s the corner stone of our democratic aspiration and development. I am of the opinion that the toil, sweat and blood our forbearers shed to bequeath this Republican Constitution to us would have been in vain if we carelessly trample upon our individual rights and abilities.

Isn’t it funny and ridiculous for example when people argue that, Addo Kufuor is capable of leading the N.P.P and Ghana into success, however we should dispense off his qualities, abilities and services on the utter of presidential brotherhood? It’s worthy noting that, what defines the merit of a constitutional order over a despotic regime are the free will of choice, equality of the citizenry and above all the supremacy of the law. Is ironical we envy the development of the Americas and Europes and feel comfortable working/teaching there as second class citizens and yet shy away from the principles and ideals that had defined their development and success. In our cowardice, mediocrity and our sense of always affirming the negative, we’ve accepted and believed that everything is impossible in Ghana!

Imagine, how the pseudo-elite in our Ghanaian politics and social discourse would have reacted to a son putting in a stake to the presidency, eight years after a father’s presidency, a wife aspiring to contest the presidency of Ghana, after eight years of her husband’s occupation of the seat and twin brothers concurrently occupying the presidency and prime minister’s office of our country? Their answers would not be different from your guess, absolute impossible! TELL THEM IS POSSIBLE! Indeed, the above scenarios had been possible in the U.S.A, Poland and other democracies. The respect for the sanctity and holiness of the individual right and ability as ordained by their Creator had been the reason for their development and progress.

I finally caution and implore on all commentators and N.P.P delegates to the congress not to allow themselves to be taken away with malice and prejudice but rather allow decency, analytical choice based on individual abilities and capabilities that would represent our collective morality and aspiration.