It was with disdain that I read Ato Kwamena Dadzie’s ‘Why Mo Ibrahim Snubbed Kufuor’, an article which appeared on the websites of Joy FM, Ghanaweb and Modern Ghana. I didn’t hesitate to conclude that his article lacked balance and fairness. By the time Ato finished writing that article, he had succeeded in denigrating Kufuor’s contribution to the development of Ghana over the period of eight years that he was president.

When Ato says Kufuor ‘‘decided to shamelessly reward himself by spending our millions to buy a medallion to reward himself’’, he expresses his opinion!

When he says Kufuor ‘‘wasn’t good enough to be held up as an example for others to follow’’, that is his opinion! So also, Ato expresses his opinion when he says Kufuor doesn’t deserve the Mo Ibrahim award and that the prize committee made a good decision by refusing to award him.

It is unacceptable, however, for Ato to affirm that ‘‘rewarding Kufuor with the Mo Ibrahim award will have been an insult to Ghanaians.’’ I wonder who made Ato the spokesman of Ghanaians.

It is even more unacceptable for Ato to state categorically that: “Mo Ibrahim and his prize committee snubbed Kufuor for the same reasons Ghanaians booted his party out- unbridled corruption, shameless looting of the national coffers and a sickening disregard for the welfare of the people.’’ This was a pitiable comment Ato made. You don’t make such comments when you have absolutely no evidence to prove that indeed and indeed, Kufuor was denied of that award because he was corrupt and looted national coffers. Ato definitely doesn’t have any evidence to suggest that truly, truly, Kufuor looted state funds. How would he justify such a statement in a court of competent jurisdiction?

It is also wicked for Ato to refer to Kufuor as ‘a shameless looter who deserves to be shamed and not honoured’ and then go ahead to add that ‘‘we are exactly where we were when Kufuor was elected.’’ He and who are still where they were when Kufuor was elected? If Ato is inferring that he didn’t achieve anything throughout the eight year reign of kufuor, then that is his own palaver. He shouldn’t make general statements because many people had their lives improved.

Many Ghanaians tend to show absolute respect to our leaders when they are in power, but capriciously turn around to vilify and irrationally criticize them when they are out of power. That is exactly what Ato did in his article. It happened to Nkrumah, Busia, Liman, and Rawlings! It is beginning to happen to Kufuor; and it will definitely happen to Mills! Ato in that article went beyond criticizing the former president. He actually insulted him.

I’m not really concerned about Kufuor’s inability to win that award. My basic concern is the apparent lack of discretion, gross disrespect for authority and stark contempt of journalistic ethics that perpetually characterize Ato’s writings.

In any case, why didn’t Ato draw Kufuor’s attention to some of the things he complained about when the later was in power? Ato wants to know what Kufuor would be remembered for in twenty years. It will interest him to know that forty-three years after Nkrumah was overthrown and vilified by Ghanaians, they are now beginning to appreciate his legacy. Henceforth, Twenty-first September every year will be observed as a public holiday in his honour. And this was a guy who was castigated and called all sorts of names by Ghanaians including his own ministers after the February 1966 coup.

Suffice it to state that, Ghanaians are definitely going to appreciate Kufuor’s contribution to national development with time. It is his legacy that will speak for him. Kufuor’s school feeding programme, capitation grant, national health Insurance and others have benefitted hundreds of thousands of Ghanaians, especially those in deprived regions. Kufuor also did his best to improve the country’s infrastructure. He built the presidential palace, the Sekondi and Tamale stadia, and renovated the Ohene Djan and Baba Yara stadia in Accra and Kumasi respectively. He built the Tetteh Quarshie interchange and initiated lots of projects that Mills’ government will continue, hopefully.

Many Ghanaians will attest to the fact that their lives improved tremendously during Kufuor’s presidency. The relative peace, political tolerance and good governance that Ghana is reputed for was reinforced during his tenure as president. Kufuor’s government upheld Press freedom, freedom of speech, and respect for human rights. Several multi-national companies have relocated from other parts of Africa to do business in Ghana due to the relative peace the country enjoys. Kufuor definitely deserves commendation for these. It will be disingenuous for anyone to condemn him outright and resentfully suggest that ‘Ghana is still where it was before Kufuor took over’.

The preceding observations notwithstanding, it ought to be acknowledged that Kufuor’s inability to win the Mo Ibrahim award is an indication that not every thing worked out well when he was president. I have my own reservations about the former president but that doesn’t give me the opportunity to make irrational and unsubstantiated comments about him.

Kufuor, definitely, made grave mistakes as president. He definitely could have done better with Ghana@ 50 and Ex-gratia for instance. He could also have done better by prosecuting some of his minister’s who fell foul of the law during his reign as president. He has also been accused of ignoring due process in the sale of Ghana Telecom to Vodafone. Just like Nkrumah, Rawlings and others had their flaws, these would go down in history as some of Kufuor’s flaws. We have the right as Ghanaians to investigate and talk about these flaws; however, we mustn’t fail to do so in the most decorous and dignified manner.

Reading the comments section that followed Ato’s article, I was surprised to realize that many readers commended him for his scathing criticisms of the former president. It is an unfortunate situation which reveals a crisis of public rationality and intellectual honesty. I expected readers of that article to condemn Ato’s crude attempt at tarnishing the image of kufuor irrespective of their political affiliations. Journalists definitely have the right to express their candid opinions about all issues that affect society; however, those opinions must be expressed in a dignified and refined manner. Allegations of corruption especially, must be backed by evidence. This is what has distinguished the likes of Anas Aremeyaw Anas from the numerous journalists we have in the country today.

In any case, Ato Kwamena Dadzie shouldn’t be a hypocrite. As a journalist, he has been advised by numerous people including Prince Kumah, Stan Dogbe, and Manasseh Azure Awuni, to show respect for authority in articulating his views. But he has blatantly refused to do so. Kufuor was, at least, nominated for an award even though he didn’t win it. What prevents Ato from being nominated for a similar award in his chosen field of journalism? The Bible admonishes us to remove the beam in our own eyes so that we can see clearly to remove the mote that is in our brother’s eye. God bless our homeland Ghana. Samuel K. Obour samuelkwason@yahoo.com