Sunday, January 10, 2016

What if PNF Doesn’t Petition the President Against Charlotte Osei of EC!

              It is often said that ‘a stitch in time saves nine’ and that ‘it is only unitiated sheep who does not remember that the lion which had sprung a deadly surprise on goats could easily redirect its devouring spree to anyone it finds on its way, especially when the lion is seen lingering around the neighbourhood appearing to be hungrier’. The case of PNF and Mrs. Charlotte is that of intriguing narrative.
Record of PNF
              Progressive Nationalist Forum (PNF), a Pro-NPP youth group and great advocate for respect of 1992 Constitution of Ghana, began to earn my congenial respect when it successfully fought a constitutional battle to have Madam Lauretta Vivian Lamptey removed as CHRAJ Boss under article 146 and co of 1992 republican constitution. She was said to have flagrantly abused her office as Chairperson of CHRAJ by having unwisely spent tax payers’ money on hotel bills.  Hitherto, PNF through Mr. Richard Nyama also got a favourable Supreme Court Judgement directing government to comply with the GETFund Law of transferring statutory funds to GETFund on time.
PNF and EC Chair in tangle
         On the particular case of  Madam Lauretta which has some semblance with that of Mrs. Charlotte Osei’s, the spirit of the constitution watched on while public outcry struggled to come to terms with why she could be that profligate. When PNF started the case against Madam Lauretta, she was recalcitrant and called the bluff of PNF to have her impeached. At least, if she had acted timely and yielded to the key demand of her to resign, she would have saved some face.  She had waited until the situation got worst – beyond repairs.
           So when the same PNF frontally came out recently to allege that Mrs. Charlotte Osei may have been in breach of the constitution, Article 44(4) in particular, I was one of those whose interest was quickly drawn to it. One because of PNF’s past spirited defence of the constitution, and two because of the deep respect I had cautiously developed for the EC Chairperson, Madam Charlotte. Frankly, part of my respect for her was based on her good professional background and much the way she carefully, intelligently and attractively articulated the views of EC during the EC dialoguing conference on whether or not to compile a new electoral register for 2016 general elections.
            However, the next time I heard Madam Charlotte spoke, I was partly impressed and partly disappointed. She spoke to Samson Lardy Anyenini on ‘Joyfm Newsfile’ on 9th day of January 2016. I was so impressed about the way she responded to all the questions on the electoral register and the processes that would lead to November 7, 2016 elections. She was dazzling as usual and caught the admiration of many listeners who appeared to be convinced like me that she is really best fit for EC Chairperson in critical times like election year.  
               I was nonetheless saddened that instead of to have used the opportunity to clear the air that she was not in breach of the constitutional provision in question as had been alleged by PNF, she rather chose to be evasive. She was of the view that the air will be cleared on the matter should PNF carries out its threat of  petitioning the President or sending her to Supreme Court or whichever place to seek for constitutional interpretation and  her removal.
              Question is: what if PNF does not file a petition against Mrs. Charlotte, how do we get the air cleared on whether or not she is in breach of the constitution? Wouldn't some sort of misperception linger on in people’s minds which may affect her integrity and that of EC?
            Before Charlotte intimated  that the air would be cleared when petition is filed, she kept saying to Samson, “you are a lawyer” and then – Samson read out from the constitution what the term means, which goes as, public office “includes [but may not be limited to] an office the emoluments attached to which are paid directly from the consolidated Fund or directly out of moneys provided by Parliament and an office in a public corporation established entirely out of public funds or moneys provided by Parliament” (Article 295:1, 1992 Constitution of Ghana).
        She was apparently persuading Samson and his listeners to infer therefrom that Ghana Reinsurance Company Ltd (Ghana Re) is not a public office and thus she could not have been in breach of article 44(4) of the 1992 republican constitution of Ghana which says that, ‘the Chairperson and the two Deputy Chairpersons of electoral commission shall not, while they hold office on the Commission, hold any other public office’. I have mixed feelings and understanding primarily because I don’t have the full information on what kind of company Ghana Re exactly is – save reading from website of Ghana RE that it is a government company!
Expectation on integrity
            In matters of integrity, even though you have the right to be measured in your response to legal issues so as not to be taken out of context or used against you in court, as long as you believe in merits and conviction of your actions, you don’t have to give the slightest chance for anyone to impugn culpability thereof. You have to, without wasting time, be bold to respond directly to allegations levelled against you in the best bravado of stamina you can marshal. This is especially more applicable to a deeply politicized society where the opposition NPP has already tried hard to raise integrity issues against Madam Charlotte, especially in respect of her unfortunately alleged soft-spot posture towards NDC.  Swift response is also particularly needed in light of the very sensitive and centripetal nature of EC.
             If you know you don’t have cobwebs in your cupboard, you don’t need to be found wanting when asked by a stranger to open it. It just did not sit down well with me as to why Mrs. Charlotte could not boldly state her position on the fact that, despite being EC Chairperson since July 2015 she was, as at December 2015, still a board member of Ghana Re, a 100% government owned company – according to www.ghanare.com (retrieved 9/Jan/2016: 12:30 pm).
               As a lawyer herself, after her appointment as EC Chairperson, she may have had addressed or averted her mind to conflicts of interest situations she could find herself in based on constitutional provisions. Did she do self introspection vis-à-vis integrity protection relative to relevant constitutional provisions before or after she accepted the job as EC boss? What did she find? Didn't she think that doubling as a board member of company with government of Ghana having 100% shares could draw her into some sort of controversies – rightly or wrongly?  
Final remarks
           In the scheme of things and the exigencies of the times, Madam Charlotte should do the honourable thing if she thinks or have gotten to recognize that Ghana Re is a public company and that she may have flouted the constitution of the republic. My candid and very considerate advice, in this regard, is that having already said to have resigned as board member of Ghana Re, she should quickly go ahead and refund to the State all the emoluments she took from July 2015 when she was made EC Chairperson - as demanded by PNF.  Further on, Madam Charlotte should publicly apologize to Ghanaians for any error of judgement on her part or for likely defilement of public interest.
             This may, at least, redress any perceived dent on Charlotte’s integrity and persuade PNF to seize the long haul battle it intends to have with her as it successfully had against Madam Lauretta. But for the meagreness of any alleged breach of the constitution and the closeness Ghana is to very crucial elections, my very principled position would have been, if proven culpable,  to just ask Madam Charlotte to immediately resign and give way to someone who has no such associated blemishes.
               On the other hand, if Madam Charlotte is convinced and persuaded to believe that she was or is not in conflict of interest situation being with EC and Ghana Re, then she should quickly issue a press statement denying that she is or was in conflict of interest situation and therefore shall not resign as EC Chairperson. She must respond and act decisively NOW.
                   We can’t afford to be debating her personality and extra-activities at the time when our focus should rather be on the best processes towards transparent, credible, free, fair and peaceful general elections in November 2016. In fact, we don’t have the luxury of such a time to waste. 

No comments:

Post a Comment