Given the Ghanaian apparent rush of not-completely resolved crises between 2019 and even date and within a current world of DISTRUST, each of the others—nations and persons, it seems only a few will disagree that the one state institution which looks very disliked, is the Electoral Commission [EC], viewed in the broader political context here today.. The causes are continuum of discomforts with country, a running and altercations with political parties [in and out of opposition]. Un-dissimilarly, sandwiched with tantrums of pettiness part between politics and the ECs and ECs and a wearied country, — ‘’Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde’’ and a grown apparent sense, after registrations, that the EC could be bolted on unwillingness to relax the line it holds on means to voter-legibility. None of these is new since 1951 when the country was granted limited voting rights, by Britain. That is the only truth. Procrastinations about a pause to rectify the commissions and omissions through the years have rather tallied to cascades of the same or similar errors serially erupted, our greatest luck has been only the courts which issued rulings, as lone adult at home (‘’Nana Aberewa’—our culturally finite repository of supreme counselling-wisdom), hoping there would be no further infirmities . The spanner now is that the courts are battling public mistrust. I am bound to state that this is previous decades-long-held opinion, ante-dates the EC’s today.
Relative to the EC, expectations after change have been harangued by relentless new crises, following the same as if a permanent choreographed which stirs around the imminence of fresh national elections. It becomes more appropriate to ask how we haven’t corrected past mistakes I should note that the character of any succeeding difficulty traces to [i] lack of a stitch in time; and [ii]complicated by meeting the necessity of evolving developments—Tech and human; turn of the economy . But fall-back thinking has been that these would be raised as ‘’unfinished business’’ to complete in follow-on year(s) progressively. I know our constant probability caveat which states: ’’subject to ability’’ or, ‘’if able’’ and even both. The effect on an establishment as the EC is burdensome.
I had referenced funding. It is perennial. But the other is a recently reported, social media, an appeal to ramp up public support to jolt parliament to pass the EC’s new voting ‘’Regulatories’’ which the public at large objects. But I would state that the issue has long gone past playing it to the public gallery, to attempt to dink parliament countrywide. The reality today is the governing NPP’s majority in parliament is tiny and because its state is internally troubled. The option is simply for the EC to move on ‘cloaked olive branch’ to persuade to end the stalemate; and cautiously carve unanimous checks and balances to halt hackneyed disputes. But thirdly, lift EC from decline in public opinion ‘’in the interest of ’’ the public for’’ the interest of country.’’
The primary reasons for the foregoing are the Issues and counter arguments about the ‘limited registration’ for first timers may or not have been resolved at time of this publication. It is an old enigma, emanating from distrust, each of the others. And no one is under any illusions that the suspicions have widened because we have both never given ourselves a breather to close our defaults. History will point to widening political divisiveness blocked any vision to exit its impeding dynamics at least from UNIGOV 1979 to date. The bottom line feature is the tendency to regard every EC as doing the bid of government of the period. Therefore, ballot declarations had never won unanimous acceptance dating the start 1951as a British colony. There is no evidence though, of specific joint project to make the EC’s credibly independent. But the governance processing historically, had appeare- tended to turn up the ECs to acquire the mistrusted label of regimes’ pin-ups or cover-up sticking plasters.
Through the years after independence 1957, the crunch for ECs, are its independence, adequately funded and its mean substantively. Hindsight leads conclusion that these safeguards have not been so practically guaranteed, adding to the core of the main trappings, source of the persistent crises. I should freeze the general history for causes brief to the present and simply couple that there from the notion suggests the commission is alleged all seasons, acting sinister. We find examples in memory lane, that the politics often led to scoff election-results. And confined to only the Fourth Republic, the unacceptable had been calmed by the courts, only rekindled by a close to new stances of subsequent ECs such as the flurry of objections presently about Ghana card, pretty scarce and where to legitimately register as usual rather than unilaterally decided, casus belli, figuratively.
I shall break it with a happened-event from a West African country before the close of the 20th century. A deadline was set for presidential contestants to file their nominations. The principal presidential contender and the bulk of his party’s stronghold lived on the other side of a pontoon, virtually the only transport to the designated office to file. On deadline date the pontoon broke down from 06.00 am and was fitted to resume service at 18:30pm. Nominations officially closed on that last date at 17.00pm.
From most sides of the bantering offensive remarks, the EC here stands accused for intransigence about methodology prosecuting the limited expansion of the electoral roll, not to disenfranchise anyone.. Granted that the EC may see it differently in which case it is its utmost responsibility to open up to the public to which it accounts to ease out of this disturbing brinkmanship. From the archives here is a taste which testifies the foregoing:’’ With all of these developments, it seemed inevitable that… would attempt to tamper with the registration process as a prelude to rigging the upcoming elections.’’ (Joint statement by NDC, PNC, CPP, GCPP, NRP and Egle parties 7 Apr. 2004).Usually, the notable pattern is that the governing parties abstained. The IPAC hobbles today
As matters grind to apparent stand-still, there is a chance to question successive ECs, governments and political parties why post-electoral petitions’ recommendations to correct had been kept either in the breach or in sops to fester new problems. The intent of successive court decisions was to make the EC particularly impeccable for all and beyond. So the enigma surrounds the repeats which show deteriorated. The deduction is, can it be said that we, as a nation conduct ourselves like pampered spoilt school boys or incorrigible ‘first in love’ school girls, wearing ear cans on blinkers ?. There must be something more seriously wrong with things we do, even from post-courts, thinking about this kiddy-rounders about the same poisoned-paralysis. Is it a game of political retribution in extenso. Or, there might be something farthest from altruism. We overlook that our divided polity has overdone the rifts-syndrome. The verdict is, the years from 1951 to 2023 is longer enough than “a day in politics” lest we get caught up a stupor over an institution whose sine qua fixture cannot and needless be emphasised ad infinitum.
At curtains down, the ode is that ‘’the beauty of democracy is flexibility’’ – circumspect-principled, away from egregious behaviour and injurious counter-blames couched in injurious rhetorics, which solve nothing. I shall re-paraphrase an American political-activist’s Dr Derik Bell’s letter to an anonymous friend: [And are we safe] “our case. Is right but our peoples, lives are stunted.” Here is the case of every side is right: the EC has a case. The people are also. The ‘’stunted’’ resides in inability to conveniently register. Solution? : let’s bear with each other. I can borrow from the Chief Justice’s freezing SC and AP [Supreme and Appeal respectively] Courts Registrars’ assigning dates until the cases are ready to be heard. She means to nail protracted trials: ‘’ we find the unfortunate of citizenry thinking that …was provoked by a compromised judicial environment.’’. That is the one side to it. The other, more curiously, is that for whole Chief Justice to publicly descend on the two, is sensitively suggestive of moots: defence of the Bench and something apparently or perhaps on-toward, placed in the context of ‘’we find it unfortunate ….by a compromised judicial environment..’’
That same short-handed excerpt could interpretively be a multi-broadside apparently purposed to respond to a recent swell of public impugning criticisms of justice delivery, a neat phraseology. But I am wondering about those clogged in the systems; and that, this is not going to be a proverbial nine-day stuff. The CJ’s predecessor George Acquah ruled on delays. I am not sceptical; but for the spark of history and empirical anxieties. For instances, the EC’s and Police versus demos. The courts are seized with some key lots; and likely supposed others, reportedly threatening to unfold with non-main stream media reporting minor near-clashes in London and the US between governing NPP and dissenters. From abroad historic perspectives, these are quite reminiscent of first and second Republics, or similarly, the Nigerian failed “Biafran secessionist War’ ’[1967-70]. Both then seemed in Nigeria and now, here, appear a feel of fracturing countries. That is where the excess stresses laid and are, unambiguously.
By Prof. Nana Essilfie-Conduah
