NEWS COMMENTARY ON IEA DEBATE
BY GEORGE ASEKRE.
 If there is any truth in the saying that coming events cast their shadows, then the IEA's Presidential and Vice Presidential Debates must be critically examined again.
It is true that the IEA is a private institution and has the right to use any criteria it deems fit and best serves its interest based on its mission and vision in all its endeavors. It is also true that any institution that engages in any public event is under legal obligation to uphold the constitutional provision on similar treatment to avoid being tagged biased. Article 55 clause 3 of the Constitution states that subject to the provisions of this article a political party is free to participate in shaping the political will of the people to disseminate information on political ideas, social and economic programme of national character and sponsor candidate for election to any public office other than to District Assemblies or lower local government unit. The deliberate attempt by the IEA to  limit the debate to only parties with representation in Parliament raises eyebrow. It appears to be  an attempt to deny millions of Ghanaians  access to different views on how they want to be governed. Besides, the IEA is gradually trying to restrict the constitutional provision of widening participatory democracy which must not be allowed to continue. These were reinforced by the comments made by the executive director of the IEA, Jean Mensah and a Member of the IEA debate planning committee. In fact, they created the impression that the IEA debates are to provide Ghanaians the opportunity to examine the view points of the candidates and hence inform their decision in the polls. By this, is the IEA telling the electorate to make choices from only the four candidates who had access to its platform? Nothing can be more discriminatory than this. Why should the IEA think that no independent candidate is  worth winning the election, hence have his views articulated through the IEA platform if indeed that platform has the power to effect change? The argument that the Commission on presidential debates in the US restricts its debates to only two parties is neither here nor there. Ghana is a sovereign state and is not under any obligation be it legal or moral to emulate everything from the US. In any case, is Ghana  the US? The claim by the IEA that its decision is partly due to logistical constraint is untenable. Are we not constantly told that democracy is expensive? Should inadequate resources lead to unjustifiable, subjective and individually or selectively targeted decisions? Another serious constitutional issue that ought to be looked at critically is the provision in Clause 12 Article 55 which mandates the state-owned media to give the same amount of time and space to all presidential candidates to present their programmes to the people. By carrying the IEA selective programme live, it is incumbent on the state own-media to find alternative ways of giving equal time and possibly prominence to all other registered presidential candidates to also present their views  since such is their non-negotiable right. Ghana is for all of us,  hence any participatory competition that is transparent need to be embraced by all whist any move that is selective must not be encouraged . After all,  are thieves not dealt with when caught, but is it not true that some people steal purely to satisfy their hunger? If  the limited resources argument by the IEA is justified, others might make similar flimsy excuses to engage in unfair treatment. If the state wants such competitive debate, then the NCCE must be empowered to organize one. The IEA must come again.
 GIA 

26 - 12 - 12
NEWS COMMENTARY ON ILLEGAL MINING

                                    
Twenty years since the legalisation of small-scale mining in Ghana, illegal mining has succeeded in positioning itself as one of the worst threats to the country. The passage of PNDC Law 218 to  check  illegal mining has not yielded any positive results making many wonder if we are serious as a country. Research indicates that less than 30 percent of miners operate legally. A visit to mining communities across the country particularly the Eastern, Western, Ashanti and Brong Ahafo Regions reveal a picture that can sadly be described as hopeless. Open pits besieged by young men and women digging for gold without care of the dangers being created to the environment, posed to themselves, the larger community and worse of it all the health of the inhabitants. As if this is not enough, the Chinese are invading the mining communities with sophisticated equipment thereby destroying the environment even faster. The sad aspect of this is that some of these Chinese are heavily armed even with guns and ready to fiercely resist any attempt to prevent their activities. This is happening in the midst of laws coherently codified and well printed in our statute books indicating that small-scale mining is a preserve for Ghanaians alone. Today illegal mining has grown beyond a mining problem to become a national security and  environmental issue.  A dozen of  the Chinese openly use excavators, move into a community and before one realises it, wreck farmlands and turn local streams into mud puddles. The question is what is so special about illegal mining that Ghana as a sovereign nation cannot control? On the 30th of September this year the Chinese Embassy in Ghana posted on its website that 38 illegal Chinese miners have been deported a month earlier. What do we see today? Many more Chinese are on the ground mining illegally with impunity. In August this year, 20 Chinese were arrested for operating without residential and work permit following  the setting up of a committee by the IGP, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Minerals Commission. Ghanaians  were told that the suspects will be tried soon, but only God knows what has since happened. It is true that bilateral trade between Ghana and China has been of immense benefit to Ghana but that cannot and must not be a compensatory excuse for foreigners to destroy our lands and take away our natural resources. People  living in mining communities must rise and say no to illegal mining else they will be the first to suffer any calamity as a result. Whether traditional rulers, politicians or so called  big wigs are involved or not should not be an excuse. What is wrong is wrong and must be treated as such. As we celebrate Christmas, let us remember the love God showed us by bringing his only son Jesus to die for  us. This love must be extended by us to the environment. Let us be reminded that if we allow our environment to be destroyed through illegal mining, posterity will not forgive us. Merry Christmas to all Ghanaians.
BY GEORGE ASEKERE

COMMENTARY ON BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION

Bribery and Corruption together is a social problem that has come to stay with us. It is a negative phenomenon and impinges on the conscience of many because of its debilitating effects on development. Bribery and corruption have been cited as the major reason for the overthrow of governments both military and civilian since independence. The Anin Commission appointed by the Kutu Achaempong led National Liberation Council in 1975 defined bribery and corruption as the giving and receiving of a gift or attempts to extort a gift or a valuation consideration whether cash or kind with the object of influencing a person in a position of trust to act in a way favorable to the interest of the giver. Persons in positions of trust act according to set of rules either explicitly stated or understood, so if in the course of exercising such powers any person attempts to influence their conduct with gifts either in cash or kind such a person is indulging in bribery since the intent is to corrupt the official. The Anin Commission further revealed that if the person holding the position of trust demand a gift from possible beneficiaries in order to favor them before performing such functions, the trustee is clearly corrupt. Why should one know someone or have a link with a big man in order to get what one rightfully deserves. Sociologically, bribery and corruption are not synonymous terms. Bribery is narrower, more direct and less subtle.

In fact there cannot be bribe givers without bribe takers, hence the assertion that the giver is as guilty as the receiver. Corruption can and frequently does exist even when there are no personal tempers or guilty confederates. In the assertion of Nye (1967) the use of reward to pervert the judgment of a person in a position of trust also constitutes bribery. Empirically if someone in a high position agrees to help a friend or relative of another person in an equally high position with the hope of reciprocity, that person is corrupt. Whichever way one looks at the phenomenon, bribery is wrong whether it results in the bending of rules or outright violation. The issue of bribery and corruption is so serious that in most organizations the bureaucratic principle which requires the impersonality of inter-personal relation also known as ‘Sine Ire Et Studio’ in Latin meaning, an act without ill-will, is being violated. The principle of first come first serve has no prominence anymore in many places. It is common knowledge that in some organizations today promotions and selection are no longer the preserve of technical competence due to bribery and corruption. Sadly the canker has led to the situation where in some institutions less educated, low ranked in hierarchy sometimes get comparatively higher remuneration than more qualified and higher ranked seniors. The belief that one needs to pay huge sums of money or have a link before one can get a job has saturated the minds of many young graduates seeking for jobs and rightfully so. As for what some bosses do to our young ladies before offering them jobs, only God and the principal actors know. Admittedly many organizations have square pegs in round holes and the output is low productivity, mediocrity and waste of public resources. Why on earth should we have ghost names on our payrolls? Why should one lobby before getting an appointment? Or why should it take some officials over six months and sometimes years to process documents for payment of newly enrolled nurses or appointed teachers when people are being paid to do that as their job description. The fight against bribery and corruption must therefore be taken more seriously bearing in mind that until the root causes are identified and nipped in the bud, we may only be joking. The fight must tackle both the precipitating and perpetuating factors squarely.

The socialization of Ghanaians which make us feel and believe that we have a prescriptive or even a God-given right to depend on brothers, sisters, cousins, uncles and other relatives for all kinds of help play a role in corruption and must be given a second look . Also supervisors of administrative controls and the suppression of moral courage in the name of preserving good social relations should be reconsidered. Religious leaders must intensify the crusade against the pervasive acquisition on the get rich quick syndrome by first discouraging expensive funerals and marriages. Bribery and corruption has the potential of making our nation unattractive to visitors. It kills many psychologically and widens the social class gap making the richer ever richer and the poor ever poorer. Bribe givers and takers as well as those who engage in all sorts of corrupt acts must the reminded that no condition is permanent. They may succeed today but judgment surely awaits us all. A word to the wise, we have long been told is enough.

BY GEORGE ASEKRE OF GBC, RADIO NEWSROOM.