The Chix Files

Prove Human Logic Wrong

2011-11-01T07:14:00.001Z

"Before success comes in any man's life, he is sure to meet with much temporary defeat, and perhaps, some failure. When defeat overtakes a man, the easiest and most logical thing to do is QUIT. That is exactly what the majority of men do. Failure is a trickster with a keen sense of irony and cunning. It takes great delight in tripping one when success is almost within reach." As we continue this week, I urge you all to keep going hard. Success is around the corner just when you feel like quitting. Let's take the high road and prove human logic wrong. Have a good day.
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on Tigo Ghana Network

Prove Human Logic Wrong

2011-11-01T07:13:00.001Z

Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on Tigo Ghana Network

Temporary Defeats

2011-10-31T08:18:00.001Z

"One of the most common causes of failure is the habit of quitting when one is overtaken by temporary defeat. Every person is guilty of this mistake at one time or another." As we start this week, we will face a number of obstacles. Treat them as temporary defeats and move on. The end result will definitely be worth it. Enjoy your day.
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on Tigo Ghana Network

The Media is failing in its Role in National Development

2011-09-19T22:08:00.002+01:00

The media as the fourth realm ofgovernment has an important role to play in the national development of anycountry; and especially, the national development of a developing country suchas Ghana. It is therefore sad to find the media drowned or concerned orprioritising news items and discussion topics that draw the attention of theordinary Ghanaian from matters and issues affecting national development. Infact, it is not only sad but extremely shameful and pathetic. One may arguethat the media, particularly the privately owned media, are more concernedabout making money so therefore, whatever that sells i.e. whatever will geteveryone to tune in and listen is what they will be concerned about or prioritise.But really and truly speaking, should that be the case? What happened to themoral obligation to ensure that the citizenry are informed? The media findsitself in a position where it is charged with a duty to encourage nationaldevelopment. I do give credit to some media houses for attempting to make aneffort.

However, when things such as Wikileaks andother unnecessary matters dominate the topics for discussion all over thecountry for over one week or over seven days or over 168 hours or over 10,080minutes (I hope you get the point), then there is cause to worry. And the worryis that the media is not living up to its role and moral obligation in nationaldevelopment. The worry is that the media is as guilty and corrupt as thepoliticians who seek their own interests as opposed to the interests of thecitizenry who entrusted them with such positions. It is even more worrying whenonly a few days after the main opposition party’s leader gives his first speechoutlining his policies and programmes the media decides “let’s not concernourselves with what he has to offer Ghanaians. Instead, let’s discuss whatAmerica’s mission in Ghana is saying about Ghana and other unnecessarymatters.” What the media is saying is “let’s divert attention from what willdevelop Ghana to what will cause deeper divisions in Ghana”.

Nana Addo’s speech at the first LibertyLecture organised by the Danquah Institute should have been put on the tableand dissected. Questions should have been asked. Analysis should have beendone. What does Nana Addo mean by an “industrialized economy”? How is he goingto achieve that? How can his programmes be implemented? How feasible will theimplementation be? We should have questioned what Nana Addo said to the verycore. He should not be allowed to give a fancy lecture and waltz his way intooffice. Those days and that kind of politics are way gone. We should not acceptthat it can be done simply because for about two hours Nana Addo said it couldbe done. What the media houses should have done and should do is tointellectually challenge each aspect of Nana Addo’s speech. Get the economists,trade experts, financial experts, entrepreneurs, tax experts, educationexperts, health experts and all the very brilliant and fancy experts there arein Ghana (and I know we have way too many) and critically analyse every aspectof Nana Addo’s speech and then discuss the analysis. That is what a media housewith the national development of Ghana at heart would have done or should doinstead of discussing the unnecessary such as Wikileaks.

My very good friend Gabby recently threw anice and polite challenge to the brains in NPP. I in turn challenge all theGhanaian brains to debate Nana Addo’s speech bearing in mind some of thequestions posed above. Every year we churn out thousands of graduates from ouruniversities and tertiary institutions. We believe they finally have what ittakes to live in the society and contribute to building a modern society. Sothere is no question that there are brains out there which can analyse NanaAddo’s speech. “Where are the Ghanaian brains”? And I throw a further challengeto the media houses: encourage the debate of these issues. Personalities don’tdevelop a nation. It is sound policies and viable programmes that develop anation. That is what Nana Addo is proposing. Analyse his proposal.

Before I end this short note, I would liketo say I strongly believe Nana Addo is the man who can do the job i.e. returnGhana to the tracks of development. But the mere fact that I believe that hecan does not necessarily mean that he can which is why it is necessary for themedia to scrutinise his policies and programmes and put them to a strict test. Heis proposing a modern society of opportunities for every Ghanaian. Greatnations are built by principled men of vision, courage and conviction. Leaderswith can-do spirit built Malaysia, South Korea and Singapore. We can do it tooright here in Ghana. Nana believes Ghana cannot continue doing the same thingand expect BETTER results. I agree with him. We need to solve Africa’s problemswith practical African solutions. For 35 years Nana Addo has been at the frontfighting for the Ghanaian to be free and prosperous. Since the 1990s he hasbeen saying the same thing: “we need to transform the economy”. We have soldraw materials for over 100 years and yet we are poorer than ever. Oil willcertainly not make us rich if we carry on selling and exporting. We need to addvalue to our oil. That is what Nana wants to do and he believes in thecompetence and confidence of Ghanaians to do this. Ghanaians must give him the chancefor him to lead us to do it. Let’s believe we can do it.

So what exactly did Nana say in that twohour period that I keep stressing we need to debate and have thought provokingdiscussions about. Nana Addo said he will focus on EDUCATION, SKILLS and JOBS.He said he will put Ghana back to work. EDUCATION means JOBS. SKILLS mean JOBS.The Youth need SKILLS and JOBS. It is therefore not rocket science that NanaAddo is the candidate with the interest of the Youth at heart. Adding value toour economy means more JOBS and decent JOBS means decent PAY. Nana Addo and theNPP will once again make credit available to Ghanaians and small businesses.Access to credit means JOBS. More contracts will go to Ghanaian companies tocreate JOBS for Ghanaians. INDUSTRIALISATION means JOBS. Ghana has thepotential to become an African industrial centre. Modernising AGRICULTURE meansJOBS. Nana Addo will create JOBS in this sector to solve rural poverty. He willgrow a multi-billion dollar palm oil industry like Malaysia. Building moreroads means JOBS. It is a fact that NPP almost doubled Ghana’s roads in 8years. Keeping Ghanaians alive and healthy means JOBS. NPP will revive NHIS toserve all Ghanaians. Strengthening democracy means more investments for moreJOBS. Nana Addo also proposed his “TEACHER FIRST” policy. This essentiallymeans that the focus will be on the needs of the teacher to ensure free qualityeducation for every child.

If it is not obvious already, a key wordthat ran through Nana Addo’s two hour speech was JOBS, JOBS and JOBS. At a timewhen unemployment is at its highest in the world and in Ghana, Nana Addodangles the JOBS bone before the unemployed citizenry of Ghana and the mediahouses and the Ghanaian brains push it aside and discuss Wikileaks and personalities.It is rather shameful. There is a lot to discuss from Nana Addo’s speech and Ihope the media will live up to its expectation in the national development ofGhana and critically analyse Nana Addo’s two hour speech delivered at theLiberty Lecture.

Written and Edited by:

Kow A. Essuman, Esq.

LL.B. Hons (Westminster), PgDip(BPP), LL.M. (Cornell)

Barrister-at-Law (Lincoln's Inn)

Attorney and Counselor-at-Law (NewYork)

All comments, corrections and contributions should be sent tokaessuman@yahoo.com.

Similar articles can be accessed at http://nppfuture.comand http://thechixfiles.blogspot.com.

This post is based on the thoughts, observations andopinions of Kow A. Essuman, Esq. Any attempt to reproduce all or any part ofthis article without the express permission of the above named person shall bean infringement of intellectual property laws; following which the authorreserves the right to commence an action/suit against any such person(s) orbody for breach of copyright and/or any other action/suit the author sees fit.

Do You To The Benefit of Others and Mankind

2011-08-22T08:20:00.002+01:00

Good morning folks! Another morning another week. Again, I wish to challenge the status quo. We're usually told not to care about what others think of us. We should just do what we feel is right and what works best for us. I strongly disagree. This individualistic approach to things has led or is leading to the breaking down of the western society. Regardless of how you may put it, the phrase 'Imma do me' should not be on our minds. I say this because our actions and omissions affect those around us even when we're not aware. You may succeed in doing you but it will be to the detriment of many others who may in turn take a similar stance and influence another and the cycle goes on. I believe in Christianity, we're told not to let our actions deter others from being saved. I think we should apply this principle in our lives. Today and henceforth, I encourage you to do you to the benefit of others and all mankind. Have a good day.

Individual Ability is Only One Factor in Success

2011-08-11T08:09:00.002+01:00

Good morning folks. So I'm reading or more like listening to this audiobook by Malcolm Gladwell called Outliers, The Story of Success and I can't help but relate. Gladwell makes the argument that success is not based solely on our individual ability. That is far too 'simple' he says. Circumstances that surround us determine our success such as when we were born, the community we grow up in, the people we have as friends and family, the timing of an opportunity and many other factors. Gladwell's argument is nothing new to me for I am living example. I always say to the people around me that God has mapped out my life so no matter the extent of the detour I take I'll always be back to the mapped out road. I never hesitate to let them know that if I had remained in Ghana post secondary, I would not have chalked any of my achievements at such an early age and most of all, I wouldn't have been a lawyer. So I agree with Gladwell 100 per cent for now. When I'm done with the book, I'll let you know whether that is still the position. God bless you today and have a good day.

Judging on Appearance

2011-08-10T15:10:00.003+01:00

Good morning people. Wise words for today are from Jean de la Fontaine. He says "beware, so long as you live, of judging men by their outward appearance". I think this week is gonna be about judging people. Everyone in this world is judged or judges another by their outward appearance. When I have to attend an interview, I wear a properly pressed suit with a white shirt and a not too striking tie. My hair is cut and beard shaved to skin. Simply because I want to be taken serious. I have a higher standard than usual so when I see a lady with too much cleavage I wonder "why". Sometimes the first thing that pops into my head is this person has no morals and more often than not, I'm wrong. They may just have too much breasts to "remain-in-bra". We all see a man with long locks and simply assume they're from Jamaica or belong to the rastafari religion and the classic thin slice of all, they are weed smokers and fans of Bob Marley. Haha. More often than not they're none of that. I know many christian, non weed smoking classic loving non Jamaicans. So perhaps the saying is right. We should beware that we don't turn the best away simply by judging on appearance. However, we should aim to make a good first and lasting impression so appearance is equally important. Have a good day.

First Springs of Great Events

2011-08-10T15:06:00.003+01:00

Arise and shine. Good morning fellas and felletes. Lol. I trust your sleep was restful. If it wasn't, well what can I say besides there's more sleep after death so let's get our hustle on. Wise words for today is from Jonathan Swift - "the first springs of great events, like those of great rivers, are often mean and little." Reminds me of the famous saying "a journey of a thousand miles begins with one step". So today, no matter how little your effort is, know that it is a significant contribution to a great event. Of course you must have a general idea of what the great event is or will be otherwise your efforts will be cos 90. Have a good day.

Judging People

2011-08-10T14:41:00.002+01:00

Good morning y'all. Wise words for today. So we're always told not to judge people. Sad thing is we're always judging or thin slicing people. When we have to take a decision regarding someone, we're judging them, are we not? So we need to revise the advice on judging people. I suggest we should judge people so long as we have a fair idea of their circumstances. Have a good day y'all and thin slice as much as you can.

Review of Kwaw Ansah's 'The Good Old Days "The Love of AA"'

2010-11-20T00:12:00.003Z

I had the opportunity of attending the premiere of the abovementioned movie. It was my mother's birthday and after watching the abovementioned movie, I must say it was the most appropriate birthday present. It reminded her and my father so much of their young school days. The setting of the movie, the clothes worn by the actors, the pen and ink used by the actors. They continued to talk about the movie on the way home in the car.

I wished I grew up in the good old days. I think the experience would have been amazing. Letter writing to express your love, having to dip your pen in the inkbottle after every three letters and blotting the excess ink with a 'blotter' or chalk.

That said I had some expectations. I had heard so much about Kwaw Ansah and his famous movie, Love Brewed in an African Pot, and was expecting a sophisticated, high class movie. The abovementioned movie did not meet my expectation.

The storyline was good but happened so fast. I think there could have been more to this movie than there was. There was a lack of cohesion and fluency. It was unrealistic and artificial. A good example is when Esaaba and AA's parents met. I can bet my last penny that no parent in that situation will act the way they did and as calm as they did.

Lastly, the Abudu and Andani story was absolutely out of place. It is obvious what Kwaw was seeking to achieve but it had no relevance whatsoever to the storyline.

The music at the end written by Kwaw Ansah, dedicated to Mac Tonto and Teddy Osei, sang by Kwabena Kwabena and Dela, was brilliant and keeps playing in my head.

Thank you Kwaw Ansah; you made my mother's night and certainly my night. I look forward to the remaining 23 episodes of The Good Old Days.

What is the NDC all about?

2010-10-19T14:02:00.001+01:00

The question on the minds on many Ghanaians including myself is “What is the NDC all about?” You have to feel sorry for the NDC. You really have to because you simply cannot envision the direction NDC is taking Ghana. Or, maybe you can. It has been common knowledge within the opposition and the private sector that the NDC had no ‘better Ghana’ agenda as they promised Ghanaians. It seems to me that the public sector is finally gaining this knowledge.

For as long as I have known the NDC, it has always held itself out as the social democratic party in Ghana. In fact, on the international stage, the NDC is a nominal member (because they offer no socio-economic solutions that can be placed on the American and European political spectrum) of Socialist International. Since the NDC brands itself as a social democratic party, it will be beneficial to readers to understand what social democracy is all about.

Social democracy is a political ideology of the centre-left on the classic political spectrum. The contemporary social democratic movement seeks to reform capitalism to align it with the ethical ideals of social justice while maintaining the capitalist mode of production, as opposed to creating an alternative socialist economic system. Practical modern social democratic policies include the promotion of a welfare state, and the creation of economic democracy as a means to secure workers' rights.

Therefore, the NDC as ‘the’ social democratic party in Ghana will naturally be expected to implement practical democratic policies which should obviously promote a welfare state and create an economic democracy as a means to secure workers’ rights. Ask any Ghanaian whether the NDC is living up to its ideology or whether the NDC is implementing practical modern social democratic policies and the answer you will receive will be a resounding NO!

I will limit my examples to very recent events which demonstrate that the NDC is not implementing practical modern social democratic policies. I must stress that the question as to whether the NDC is implementing any policy is not what is being discussed. The NDC has failed as a social democratic party supposed to secure workers’ rights.

At the time of typing this post, university and polytechnic lecturers were on strike; students of the various polytechnics were demonstrating in Accra urging the government to review the salaries and allowances of their lecturers; senior high schools were rejecting first year students because preparation had not be made towards an intake this year; first year students who had been admitted at senior high schools across the country were facing accommodation problems as no preparation had been made by the government in light of the changes in the length of senior high school education; workers across the public sector including nurses were threatening to go on strike; and high numbers of unemployment across the country. These are a few of the ‘happening now’ examples of how the NDC has failed and is failing Ghanaians as a social democratic party supposed to promote a welfare state and secure workers’ rights.

If workers are striking during an NDC administration then something is fundamentally wrong with the ideology of the party and within the structures of the party. There is a saying – if you don’t know where you are coming from, how will you know where you are going. I have no idea why the NDC chose to be a social democratic party. Maybe they simply thought ‘we will be the opposite of the NPP’. In any event, the least they can do is fulfill their electoral promises to Ghanaians.

My advice to the NDC is that they should address issues surrounding welfare and workers rights well ahead of a strike. Strikes are strategic coup d'états for social democratic parties.

Written and Edited by:

Kow A. Essuman Esq.

LL.B. Hons (Westminster), PgDip (BPP), LL.M. (Cornell)

Barrister-at-Law (Lincoln's Inn)

Attorney and Counselor-at-Law (New York)

All comments, corrections and contributions should be sent to kaessuman@yahoo.com.

This post is based on the thoughts, observations and opinions of Kow A. Essuman Esq. Any attempt to reproduce all or any part of this article without the express permission of the above named person shall be an infringement of intellectual property laws; following which the author reserves the right to commence an action/suit against any such person(s) or body for breach of copyright and/or any other action/suit the author sees fit.

The Liverpool Saga

2010-10-16T15:57:00.001+01:00

I chose not to blog about this issue but changed my mind when I realised not only was it an interesting topic from a sporting angle but also, it raises a lot of legal issues that lawyers, especially international lawyers, should take notice of. Also, most importantly, I believe patrons of my blog will find it interesting.

What makes this very interesting is the fact that it involves American owners (Hicks and Gillett) of a British entity (Liverpool) who sought an injunction in a different jurisdiction (Texas) to prevent a sale from taking place between an entity (Liverpool) based in England and an entity (NESV) based in Massachusetts.

Hicks and Gillett purchased Liverpool in 2007. Earlier this year they decided to put Liverpool up for sale and therefore brought in Martin Broughton to chair the board and lead the sale. A sale was necessary because of the debt (GBP237 million) owed to RBS by Liverpool. Hicks and Gillett initially wanted GBP600 million for Liverpool. However, NESV offered GBP300 million. It is estimated that Hicks and Gillett lost about GBP143 million as a result of this transaction.

Besides NESV there was a consortium of Asia investors who put in a bid higher for Liverpool. Realising how murky the situation was going to be coupled with their chances to persuade the board to sell Liverpool to them, they withdrew their bid leaving NESV as the only potential buyer.

It was either NESV or administration i.e. Liverpool would have been placed in administration to in order to pay off the debt owed to RBS. Hicks and Gillett sought an injunction to prevent the sale to NESV from taking place. The injunction also sought damages of over $1 billion.

The High Court in England and Wales struck out the injunction stating that it had no effect in England and Wales and instructed Hicks and Gillett to withdraw their injunction from the court in Texas or be held in contempt of court – clear-cut example of a conflict of laws issue.

What readers should think about is why Hicks and Gillett decided to seek an injunction in Texas as opposed to England and Wales. The only reason why Texas had an interest in the case was because Hicks and Gillett resided there. Should that be enough to issue an injunction to prevent a sale in England and Wales?

I think not and so did the High Court judge who ruled that the injunction had no effect in English courts. Hicks and Gillett may be right about the epic swindle by RBS and Liverpool’s board – why did they not file the injunction in the High Court of England and Wales?

There is a lot to think about regarding this saga but I am particularly glad that Liverpool has a new owner who is more than capable of turning the football club around. Surely not to win the Premier League any time soon. Ha-ha.

Once Bitten, Never Shy…

2010-08-13T23:02:00.001+01:00

“Will you stop saying that?” I said to her. But she wouldn’t stop. She repeated herself “Trust me my dear, you will fall in love again. And this time, it will be sweeter than before. You will be in love deeper than the last time.” “And the hurt will be more painful than the one I’m feeling right now” I added.

The words of the great playwright, poet and author, Oscar Wilde, quickly ran through my mind as she spoke those words. According to Oscar, “When love comes to an end, weaklings cry, efficient ones instantly find another love, and the wise have one in reserve.” I have never been a weakling and was not about to join that category of persons. Certainly not wise because I didn’t have one in reserve. And I didn’t want to be efficient.

A saying I had become familiar with in my school days became ever so relevant. I said to her “Once bitten, twice shy”. Clever as she always is, she replied "my dear, when it comes to love that saying changes.” I laughed wondering how she intended to support that argument. But then she continued to explain her position “In love matters, once bitten, NEVER shy”.

It has taken me a while to understand what she meant. The beauty of being in love is the uncertainty of the future; the possibility of being hurt. We’re meant to get hurt when we’re in love. Our hearts will get broken. We’ll be shattered by events that led to the heartbreak and after. But that’s what makes this feeling of love special and different. We just don’t stop there and call it quits. What we need to do is pick ourselves up and be efficient. If you’re wise enough to have one in reserve, the better. Whatever you do, make sure you love again because when it comes to love, “Once Bitten, Never Shy!”

NPP Youth UK Meeting

2010-07-08T20:05:00.000+01:00

The Annual General Meeting of the Youth Wing of NPP UK to be held on 10 July 2010 at 726 - 728 Seven Sisters Road, London N15 5NH from 4pm to 7pm.

For more information visit our Facebook page by searching NPP Youth UK on Facebook or visit our website at www.nppyouthuk.com or email us at nppyouthuk@gmail.com

Be there to share your ideas. The Future is NOW!!!

An Invitation to Join the Youth in Building Ghana

2010-06-20T22:20:00.001+01:00

Fellow Citizens,

We hope you accept our invitation to participate in a campaign for the development of Ghana and the African continent at large.

In the past, we have underestimated the power and influence of the youth in politics. This is a new era and I am sure you are aware of it. The wind of change keeps blowing around democracies in the world. The one thing this wind carries, which is common to all democracies, is the impact of the youth in the campaign for change.

In relation to our own party, we always complain, or at least the people we speak to, complain that the Ghanaian youth are not influential enough in the Party. That may be true to some extent. Those who rebut such an assertion state the universities have strong student organizations which participate in politics. The question we should ask ourselves is, "should that be where it stops"?

The development of Ghana is in the hands of the "cheetah generation" – to borrow the words of George Ayittey. That is, you and I and every young Ghanaian. We share a common vision. And for those who live outside Ghana, the vision gets clearer each day as we realise that the development of Ghana lies not in the foreign aid and international financial institutions but in the hands of Ghanaians.

We hope you join us. Once a member of the group, you shall receive information about this branch of our party. We aim to have a very organized and influential wing. We'll need your support throughout the process.

If you believe in Ghana's development and want to be a part of it, then look nowhere else. Spread the word to your friends, acquaintances and family. We hope to count on you for financial support when the time comes. In return, we promise to deliver a wing of the party which will serve the greater interest of Ghana.

For now, spread the word. We also encourage you to visit this page at least once a day. We will keep you updated on news in Ghana and within the party. We will also update you on events you can attend. If you wish to formally join the NPP Youth UK, kindly send us an email at nppyouthuk@gmail.com and we will send you a copy of the form to fill.

We look forward to working with you to return development in freedom back into power. The future is now. Let us solve today's problems with today's solutions.

Yours faithfully,

NPP Youth UK.

African Politics does not need Pensioners.

2010-06-13T01:12:00.002+01:00

It is not a disputed fact and I hope readers will not dispute the statement that a majority of African leaders are over 50 years old. The reason, I am sure, is deeply rooted in African culture i.e. the elderly are deemed to be very wise and cannot be challenged by anyone else except someone of the same age group or even older. It therefore goes without saying that African culture places emphasis on the respect for the person with the greyest hair. Or maybe not as my brother, the youngest of us all, has the greyest hair.

But you get the point I am trying to make. If not then the point I am making is “with age comes great respect” regardless of the person’s background. That is not a bad thing and I am not saying the elderly do not deserve the respect they are due as a result of their age. The justification for the respect accorded to age lies with the fact that a person acquires vast experience as they grow older. True. And the next generation can certainly benefit from their experience. Again, this is very much true and I agree.

So then what is my problem you may ask? Why is Kow Essuman writing this piece if he agrees that "with age comes experience and respect"? Simple – Africans tend to be less interested or not interested in politics until they hit 40 years and in some cases 50 years. And those with presidential ambitions wait until they are over 60 years before realising their ambition. This is wrong. Why should people nearing their pension age or people past pension age be making decisions for a country? Africa does not need leaders who are continuously ill, unfit or die whilst in office.

To solve a problem, you must first understand the problem. Most of today's problems require today's solutions. Yet we elect leaders from yesterday. How do we expect them to solve today's problems with yesterday's solutions? That is even if they understand today's problems. Even if they were to solve today's problems with yesterday's solutions, I can guarantee that it would be at a snail's pace. Africa can never be economically independent at such a pace.

So what am I proposing? The youth should be encouraged to participate in government not just voting and campaigning. They should be an integral part of the administration of the country. That way today's problems will be solved by people who understand today's problems and with solutions which are today's solution. It will also prepare the youth who have presidential aspirations to gain practical governing experience so they can be ready to govern when the time comes. Not when they hit their pension age.

The youth should be encouraged right from when they attain voting age or even earlier. It would interest you to know that a majority of electorates are the youth. So why then do we have pensioners in government? I may be called disrespectful for some of the statements in this piece and that is one of Africa's problems – the elderly can never be criticised by the young. Well, this is severely hindering our progress so it must cease.

To end this, I introduce an organization committed to ensuring that the youth are not just dormant participants in politics but very active participants even at the administrative level – NPP Youth UK. I strongly suggest that if you believe in solving Africa's problems, you join this group. To join, simply send an email to nppyouthuk@gmail.com indicating your intention to join. Let us solve today's problems with today's solutions.

Written and Edited by:

Kow A. Essuman Esq.

LL.B. Hons (Westminster), PgDip (BPP), LL.M. (Cornell)

Barrister-at-Law (Lincoln's Inn)

Attorney and Counselor-at-Law (New York)

All comments, corrections and contributions should be sent to kaessuman@yahoo.com.

The Mills Administration is not committed to the greater interest of Ghana

2010-05-31T16:45:00.001+01:00

I enjoy hiplife music so much and find the issues they raise very interesting. Recently, the artists have stepped up their creativity as a result of the fierce competition they face on the continent especially from their Nigerian counterparts. The improved creativity is not limited to music. Other forms of entertainment including movies and stand-up comedy are being improved creatively.

So it was no surprise when I heard Sidney's recent song - who born dog. Though very entertaining, it highlights an issue which is slowly affecting the relations between Ghana and Nigeria. As a Ghanaian living abroad I am constantly confronted by the Ghanaian-Nigerian love hate relationship. It is simple; we argue amongst ourselves saying we are better than the other or over the origin of a word, phrase or food but our similarities outweigh our differences by far. The amazing thing about this relationship is that when we are confronted by other nationalities we never hesitate to stand united.

So what issue is being highlighted by this rather entertaining song? Since the Mills administration took over in 2009, the relationship between the two countries has deteriorated. Ghana's development depends on the development of the region. And if the region is to develop, we need Nigeria otherwise all efforts will be wasted. It surprises me that with many trade experts in the NDC party such as Dr. Kwesi Botchway, the Mills administration is ignoring the growing tensions between these two countries.

So what is the source of these tensions? I am as clueless as you are. I have no inside information but as an outsider a few observations make it obvious that there is a strain on the Ghana-Nigeria relationship. The observations I speak of are as follows: during the Kufuor administration, Ghanaians went to bed without worrying about a shortage of fuel the next day because former president Kufuor had an arrangement with Nigeria for the supply of oil. Whatever agreement it was, I wonder why the current administration could not follow it through.

As far as I am aware (which may be inaccurate), the current administration is in negotiations with Equatorial Guinea for the supply of oil. I appreciate the fact that the current administration is at liberty to enter into negotiations with anyone. But the one question on my mind is – why abandon a strategic partner such as Nigeria for Equatorial Guinea? It could be because of policy differences or what have you but we need Nigeria so whatever it was a compromise should have been reached.

A more recent observation is the frustration of the telecommunication provider, Glo, by the government. Glo is a Nigerian company that has been investing in Ghana for the last three years. The company invested greatly in the country's premier league and had plans to increase competition in the telecommunications industry as well as create employment opportunities for the youth. Unfortunately, the current administration has frustrated Glo's efforts to do business in Ghana causing the Nigerian telecommunications company to issue threats to pull out of Ghana. As a result of this, a top level Nigerian delegation led by its Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of State for Commerce and Industry arrived in Ghana on Monday, 24 May 2010 to work out an amicable solution. Their efforts were fruitless.

So how is this related to the greater interest of Ghana? Well, trade between countries is necessary for economic development and stability. The economies of most developed countries rely on trade. According to many economists and economic institutions, if Africa is to have strong economies then trade needs to be encouraged. The Kufuor administration knowing this focussed on trade and ensured that the relationship between Ghana and Nigeria was strong. We saw the results of their effort in the growth of ECOWAS. West Africans are able to move about freely without any restriction in the ECOWAS area. There is also a substantial amount of trade in the region as well as investment e.g. many Nigerian businesses established branches in Ghana with the aim of investing and creating employment in Ghana.

There is no doubt that Ghana is a mover and shaker in ECOWAS but so is Nigeria. Ghana definitely needs Nigeria to make ECOWAS a powerful trading bloc. Some may ask why. Well, Ghana on its own at the international negotiating table will never get the best deal. On the hand a regional bloc such as ECOWAS will pool together resources which will in effect give it some leverage at the international negotiating table. Whatever agreement ECOWAS reaches with the international community will be beneficial to its members in the long run. That is the main benefit of ECOWAS.

So whatever is going on between the governments of Ghana and Nigeria, the Mills administration should bear in mind that Ghana needs Nigeria to make ECOWAS work.

Written and Edited by:

Kow A. Essuman Esq.

LL.B. Hons (Westminster), PgDip (BPP), LL.M. (Cornell)

Barrister-at-Law (Lincoln's Inn) (N.P.)

Attorney and Counselor-at-Law (New York)

All comments, corrections and contributions should be sent to kaessuman@yahoo.com.

A Brilliant Illustration of Handsfree

2010-05-07T16:48:00.002+01:00

You often hear about such things not see them. Necessity is indeed the mother of invention. After a rather long day, I stood at the bus stop waiting for a bus home. Lo and behold, a lady walks past and immediately catches my eye but for all the wrong reasons. I watched her curiously as she hurriedly got on her bus. She had a head gear on, similar to what Muslim women wear. And on the right side of her face was a mobile phone. The mobile phone had a rubberband around it. She was not holding the mobile phone, it just stayed there with the upper part of it inserted conveniently into her head gear. I smiled and thought to myself, 'a brilliant illustration of handsfree'.

Kow A. Essuman Esq.
LL.B. Hons (Westminster); PgDip (BPP); LL.M. (Cornell).
Barrister-at-Law (Lincoln's Inn); Attorney & Counselor-at-Law (New York).
http://www.linkedin.com/in/kowessuman

Sent from my HTC HD2 device.

Reasons to VOTE LABOUR on 6 MAY 2010.

2010-04-10T19:06:00.002+01:00

Here are some notable achievements of Labour since 1997:
1. Winter fuel allowance;
2. Shortest waiting times in history - NHS;
3. Crime down by a third;
4. Creation of SureStart - Children;
5. Cancer guarantee;
6. Record results in schools;
7. More students than ever - University;
8. Disability Discrimination Act;
9. Devolution;
10. Civil Partnerships;
11. Peace in Northern Ireland;
12. The Social Chapter;
13. Half a million children out of poverty;
14. Maternity pay;
15. Paternity leave;
16. Child benefit at record levels;
17. Minimum wage;
18. Ban on cluster bombs;
19. Cancelling of debt;
20. Trebling of aid;
21. First ever climate change Act;
That's the Britain Labour's been building, that's the change you should choose on 6 MAY 2010!

Watch the video and many more at:

http://www.youtube.com/labourvision

A Memorial to a Hero Needs Your Support!

2010-04-07T20:24:00.004+01:00

The month of April marks the 42nd anniversary of the death of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. We are commemorating the life and work of Dr. King by creating a memorial in our nation's capital. The Washington, DC, Martin Luther King, Jr., National Memorial will honor his life and contributions to the world through non violent social change. The Martin Luther King Jr. National Memorial will be the first on the National Mall to recognize a person of color and a man of peace, not a president or a veteran of war. In 1996 Congress authorized the Memorial Foundation to raise funds to establish a national memorial to honor the legacy of Dr. King on the National Mall. The memorial’s very existence signifies that we as a people believe Dr. King and his legacy deserve this esteemed placement in what can be considered America’s “Hall of Fame.”

We want to commemorate the life and work of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. by leading a collaborative funding, design, and construction process in the creation of a memorial to honor his national and international contributions to world peace through non-violent social change...

The vision of a memorial in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. is one that captures the essence of his message, a message in which he so eloquently affirms the commanding tenants of the American Dream — Freedom, Democracy and Opportunity for All; a noble quest that gained him the Nobel Peace Prize and one that continues to influence people and societies throughout the world. Upon reflection, we are reminded that Dr. King's lifelong dedication to the idea of achieving human dignity through global relationships of well being has served to instill a broader and deeper sense of duty within each of us— a duty to be both responsible citizens and conscientious stewards of freedom and democracy.

Dr. King championed a movement that draws fully from the deep well of America's potential for freedom, opportunity, and justice. His vision of America is captured in his message of hope and possibility for a future anchored in dignity, sensitivity, and mutual respect; a message that challenges each of us to recognize that America's true strength lies in its diversity of talents. The vision of a memorial in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. is one that captures the essence of his message, a message in which he so eloquently affirms the commanding tenants of the American Dream — Freedom, Democracy and Opportunity for All; a noble quest that gained him the Nobel Peace Prize and one that continues to influence people and societies throughout the world. Upon reflection, we are reminded that Dr. King's lifelong dedication to the idea of achieving human dignity through global relationships of well being has served to instill a broader and deeper sense of duty within each of us— a duty to be both responsible citizens and conscientious stewards of freedom and democracy.

After years of fund raising, the memorial is now $14 million away from its $120 million goal. This will be more than a monument to a great humanitarian, the National Memorial will be a place for visitors from around the world to share the spirit of love, freedom, and peace. Individuals as well as corporations can add their financial support to this effort. Contributions, large and small, are needed to attain our goal of $120 million. Spread the word to your friends, neighbors and acquaintances that their donations are urgently needed. Most major employers match employee donations, so if you donate to the Memorial Foundation your employer may double that amount.

For more information visit:

http://mlkmemorialnews.org/

BuildTheDream.org
Twitter @mlkmemorial
Facebook.com/MLKNationalMemorial

The Financial Services Authority v Amro International and Goodman Jones LLP (interested party)

2010-03-29T19:57:00.002+01:00

The Financial Services Authority v Amro International and Goodman Jones LLP (interested party)
Company Law Forum - Explaining Companies Act 2006 - Monday, 29 March 2010

The independence of Ghana: The truncated African vision and the way forward – By Kwame E. Bidi

2010-03-14T15:38:00.002Z

After several years of independence struggle, Nkrumah and the people of Ghana, with support from fellow Africans, home and abroad, succeeded finally in liberating Ghana from colonial shackles - at least politically. That happened on 6 March 1957.

There was the need, however, for the sustainable economic liberation of Ghanaians. That way, their political independence would be rendered more meaningful.

As every economist would agree, Nkrumah saw Ghana, a nation with a little over six million people at the time, as economically unviable, as it could not possibly benefit from the kind of economies of scale needed to survive and compete fairly on the international market.

Naturally, he sought to help Africa decolonize, using every means possible, so that through their collective power as a giant nation- the Nation of Africa- they would pool their resources together and become competitive economically; have a voice on the international stage, and collectively push for the interest of Africa.

The West, however, realized that, United Africa, with a socialist development agenda, together with its natural resources was a threat to its quest to world dominance. Besides, Africa might drift towards the Soviet bloc and pose a mortal threat to capitalism. To avert that potential fate, the West reasoned that the overthrow of Nkrumah would mean a defeat to the prospect of a united Africa. Because they could no longer colonize Africa, they sought to balkanize it.

As per the normal operation, the CIA masterminded his overthrow eventually, using local political opponents and the military (the recent declassified CIA files say it all:http://www.seeingblack.com/x060702/nkrumah.shtml). The government that took over was a natural puppet of the West – with capitalist leanings.

To justify the coup, the West allegedly sponsored a conspiracy with local politicians to brainwash Ghanaians. School curricula were altered to indoctrinate students against Nkrumah and the Pan-African consciousness.

With support from the West, the local politicians altered the history of Ghana to satisfy their political and ideological whims. The past and current generation of Ghanaians, including you and me, unfortunately, are victims of this conspiracy.

This explains why Nkrumah’s recognition as Africa’s Man of the Millennium, yielded to the astonishment of many Ghanaians; young and old, lettered and the unlettered.

By that singular feat, the prospect of African unity, together with its collective development was truncated. African leaders, who would not yield to the West and thus allow exploitation to continue in their countries, became targets. Many, including Patrick Lumumba of Congo, were assassinated - (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrice_Lumumba).

Today many African youth are coming back to the realization that the only true way to real African economic and political emancipation, rests in a United States of Africa.

With a common market, common currency and a continental bank, Africa would no longer need the poisonous IMF loans with its structural adjustment rhetoric to extract its own resources.

The current situation where Ghanaians stand to gain only 10% (one billion annually) of their oil revenue, while close to 90% of the dividend is repatriated outside its shores to ‘develop’ the already developed countries is a living testimony to the neo-colonial trap that Nkrumah foresaw. The case is no different from Nigeria, Congo, Zimbabwe, Namibia and SA among others.

It is my conviction that until Ghana and Africa reconcile with the inevitable reality that our true and sustainable economic and political development reside in our UNITY, the West with its agents- the IMF/World Bank, Transnational Corporations - would continue to buy our leaders with our own money and use them as instruments to further rob us!

The recent underhand Vodafone deal and the Mabey & Johnson saga in Ghana are living attestations to this inconvenient realism.

Let us resurrect our African consciousness and find African solutions to African challenges. If our leaders have traded our destiny, let us refuse to repeat it when the leadership mantle of Africa falls on us.

When this generation of Ghanaians and Africans rise to that level of conscious awareness, the independence declaration of 1957 would become ever meaningful.

Big Money Returns to American Politics: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

2010-03-10T21:51:00.001Z

Introduction

Before the Citizens United case, certain types of nonprofit organizations were able to pump millions of dollars into "electioneering communications" (highly pointed commercials about political issues that can even mention specific candidates) without revealing their donors.

For the first time, though, as a result of the ruling, corporations will be able to spend unlimited amounts of money on advertisements expressly advocating for a candidate's election or defeat. The ruling also clears the way, for the first time, for corporations to donate money to nonprofit groups that place advocacy advertisements.

A 1986 Supreme Court decision, Federal Election Commission v. Massachusetts Citizens for Life, opened the way for certain narrowly-defined nonprofit groups to advertise for and against political candidates. However, the 1986 decision forbade corporations and unions to give money to nonprofit organizations that financed advocacy advertisements. The Citizens United decision lifts that ban.

Summary of the facts and arguments

Prior to the 2008 primary elections, Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation dedicated to educating the American public about their rights and the government, produced a politically conservative ninety-minute documentary entitled Hillary: The Movie ("The Movie"). This documentary covered Hillary Clinton's record while in the Senate, the White House as First Lady and during her bid for presidential Democratic nominee, and contains express opinions about whether she would be a good choice for President. However, The Movie fell within the definition of "electioneering communications" under the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 ("BCRA")-a federal enactment designed to prevent "big money" from unfairly influencing federal elections-which, among other things, prohibits corporate financing of "electioneering communications" and imposes mandatory disclosure and disclaimer requirements on such communications.

Citizens United's sought a motion for a preliminary injunction to enjoin the Federal Election Commission ("FEC") from enforcing these provisions of the BCRA against Citizens United in the District Court for the District of Columbia. The questions the Supreme Court decided were (1) whether BCRA's disclosure requirements imposed on "electioneering communications" were to be upheld against all as-applied challenges' (2) whether BCRA's disclosure requirements were overly burdensome and fail a strict scrutiny test as-applied to The Movie; (3) whether The Movie was a "clear plea for action to vote," subjecting it to the "electioneering communications" corporate prohibition; and (4) whether The Movie constituted an advertisement, making it subject to the BCRA's disclosure and disclaimer regulations.

BCRA is a federal enactment designed to restrict "big money" from unfairly influencing national politics by regulating "electioneering communications." It defines "electioneering communications" as any cable or satellite broadcast made within sixty days before a general election or thirty days before a primary election, and which "refers to a clearly identified candidate for Federal office." See 2 U.S.C. 434(f)(3)(A). Citizens conceded that its planned advertisements and VOD broadcast of The Movie fell within this definition of "electioneering communications," making them subject to three relevant restrictions under BCRA. Firstly, BCRA § 203 prohibited Citizens from using its corporate funds to broadcast "electioneering communications" in order to advocate how a viewer should vote. See 2 U.S.C. 441b(b)(2) and (b)(4)(A). Secondly, if Citizens passed the first requirement, BCRA § 201 required Citizens to disclose the identities of anybody who contributed more than $1,000 dollars towards the production of The Movie. See 2 U.S.C. 434(f)(1), 2(F); see also 11 C.F.R. 104.20(c)(9). Thirdly, BCRA § 311 required Citizens to display for at least four seconds a written disclaimer in its advertisements stating that it is responsible for the contents. See 2 U.S.C. 441d(d)(2).

Citizens argued that a financing restriction on the film violates free speech and therefore was subject to strict scrutiny, which required that the restriction further a compelling interest and be narrowly tailored to meet that interest. Citizens contended that the FEC's anti-corruption interest was not compelling in the case of feature length films that were distributed on demand and privately financed by individuals. According to Citizens, anti-corruption is only a concern when the financial support is being given in exchange for political favors and consequently undermining the integrity of democracy. Further, viewers of Videos On Demand ("VOD") films have opted to receive the information on purpose, unlike viewers of television or radio ads, and are therefore far less vulnerable to influence or corruption. Finally, Citizens pointed out that the FEC's disparate treatment of VOD (but not DVDs) as potentially corrupt, casts serious doubt that there is a genuine state interest in preventing communication.

The FEC, on the other hand, argued that by seeking to distribute content via VOD rather than through television or radio, Citizens was trying to create its own special exception to the BCRA restrictions. According to the FEC, just because the film was not being broadcast to all viewers the same way that a television or radio ad would and rather reached only those who chose to view it, did not mean that those viewers had already made up their minds and will not be influenced by it. The FEC pointed out that even if the film merely motivated prior Hillary supporters to be more active, that effect would be enough to justify the restriction. The FEC argued that while section 203 of the BCRA extended the express advocacy restriction to certain types of media and did not explicitly include VOD, it did not grant an exemption to those media types.

Citizens argued that the disclosure requirements violated the First Amendment when applied in this case because they furthered no important government interest. According to Citizens, strict scrutiny must be applied since the disclosure requirements would force speech; however, strict scrutiny subsequently fails because there is no compelling interest. Citizens further argued that even if exacting scrutiny is used, the result would be the same. Citizens argued that the FEC's argument that the disclosure is necessary to help the audience assess the credibility of the ad did not make sense because viewers are smart enough to know to discount the message if they are unsure of its producer. Also, Citizens pointed out that even if there was some government interest, it would be outweighed by the burden that the requirements place on Citizens. Citizens feared that the requirements would turn viewers off to the film by making it seem less like a documentary and more like a piece of propaganda, and that it would hinder their ability to make future expressions because the requirements would chill donations. Citizens stressed that BCRA's disclosure requirements, like the financial restrictions, are only to be applied to express advocacy, and therefore do not extend to this communication since viewers do not need to be protected from misinformation.

In contrast, the FEC stressed that disclosure requirements were subject to exacting scrutiny rather than strict scrutiny, which meant that the restrictions must bear a substantial relation to a sufficiently important interest. According to the FEC, the interests served by the disclosure requirements here were transparency and monitoring and so must extend to all electioneering communication, and not just to those deemed to be the functional equivalent of express advocacy. The FEC pointed to McConnell, which held that disclosure requirements could be applied to all election communications even though financing restrictions could not. The FEC stressed that in order for the public to make fully informed choices, the voter needed to know the source of any information perceived to be in connection with the election in order to properly assess its credibility. Finally, the FEC argued that while in some cases the burden of the disclosure requirements could outweigh the government's interest, here this was not the case because there was no showing that the disclosure would "subject identified persons to 'threats, harassment, and reprisals.'" Moreover, the FEC contended, Citizens offered no evidence to support its arguments that the restrictions would hinder its ability to communicate, and that the disclosure was so far removed that it probably would not affect donations.

What the decision means

Experts say the ruling, along with a pair of earlier Supreme Court cases, makes it possible for corporations and unions to donate anonymously to nonprofit civic leagues and trade associations. The groups can then use the money to finance the types of political advertisements that were at the heart of last month's ruling, in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. That means that those nonprofit groups, which are not required to disclose their donors, can now use corporate contributions to buy political commercials, and the corporations can potentially operate behind the anonymity of their donations.

While the decision allows corporations to spend without limit on advertising for or against candidates, if they do so directly, they will have to report their expenditures and identify their donors. Corporations are often loath to have their names attached to such advertisements. Therefore, nonprofit groups, with their legal ability to withhold donors' names, offer an attractive alternative.

Election commission rules require that organizations and individuals placing advocacy advertising or electioneering communications report their expenditures and identify donors who gave them money for those purposes. Many nonprofit groups, however, have taken the position that their donors and dues-paying members did not give them money specifically for political uses. Therefore, the groups have maintained, they are not obligated to name contributors.

Criticisms and proposals

During the 2010 State of the Union Address, President Barack Obama condemned the decision stating that, "Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests - including foreign corporations - to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities."

Democratic Congressional leaders called the loophole dangerous, and they have proposed legislation that would require nonprofit groups to identify publicly the sources of financing for their political advertisements. Among provisions in a bill proposed in February, is a requirement that nonprofit groups engaging in political advertising set up accounts specifically for that purpose. The bill would require that the nonprofit organizations identify people and groups who contribute directly to those accounts, or whose dues or other donations are transferred from other accounts into the political accounts.

The bill would also require organizations that raise outside money for political advertisements to list their top five contributors at the end of a commercial. In addition, an advertisement would have to display a statement from its No. 1 donor accepting responsibility for its content. The bill would prohibit companies that received federal bailout money — as well as companies that hold federal contracts and companies that are more than 20 percent owned by foreign entities — from making political expenditures. It would also bar a company from doing so if a majority of its board consists of foreign principals, or if its operations in the United States or its political decision-making is controlled by a foreign entity.

The Independence of Ghana Is Still Meaningless Unless...

2010-03-06T03:40:00.001Z

On the eve of independence, some 53 years ago, Dr. Nkrumah made one of the most inspirational speeches known in African and World politics. The speech is usually remembered for 'the often referred to' statement, "the independence of Ghana is meaningless unless it is linked up to the total liberation of Africa". This statement was true and relevant at the time it was made and is even more relevant in modern times albeit in a different context. Nkrumah had a blueprint for a united Africa and took steps to ensure that the foregoing statement became a reality. Although some of the steps he took towards achieving a united Africa were criticised, the man went to the extent of getting married to a non Ghanaian to demonstrate his commitment to this cause. I strongly believe when Nkrumah made that statement he was referring to the political and economic independence of Africa.

All African countries are now rid of their respective colonial masters with Africans controlling and governing the affairs of African countries. This was only a step in Nkrumah's blueprint. The man wanted more than that. Political instability continues to trouble African countries. And it is understandable why that is so (at least in some cases). Tribalism plays a critical and very sensitive role in African politics. There are all sorts of power sharing agreements across the continent for various reasons. I am sure this was not the political independence Nkrumah visualised. However, all has not been lost. Some African countries have been able to build a political system that actually works. Botswana is a very good example but Ghana is a better example. Of course it is. If it was not, Obama would not have visited and praised Ghana's good governance.

However, I am almost certain Nkrumah's vision will not be realised any time soon because many African countries – if not all – are not economically independent. We depend on foreign aid and loans from developed countries and international financial institutions. More often than not, we are not in a position to negotiate the terms of these loan agreements and sign these agreements with absolute disregard for the long term effects on our development. Ghana is no exception.

In the past year, I have come across many ambitious young men who have expressed an interest in running for the office of president of Ghana. First of all, it is a good thing to know the youth is interested in the politics of their country. Secondly, it is an even better thing to know they all have development of the Ghana as an agenda. As I spoke with these ambitious young men, I realised they all had brilliant policies and ideas; that when implemented accordingly, will definitely move the country forward economically and politically.

My only problem with the policies and ideas these ambitious young men spoke of was that the policies and ideas were only with concerned the development of Ghana. This brings me back to the title of this short note – the independence of Ghana is still meaningless unless... Personally, I do not think a united Africa can be achieved. The continent is too large to make that a reality. Nonetheless, a strongly integrated region is not farfetched. If Ghana manages to become economically independent leaving its neighbours and fellow members of ECOWAS behind, a situation will be created whereby citizens of other ECOWAS countries will end up in Ghana seeking greener pastures. A burden will then be placed on the Ghanaian economy to the detriment of Ghanaians. Moreover, if any of the ECOWAS countries encounter severe political instability; their citizens will seek refuge in a politically stable Ghana – again, placing a burden on the Ghanaian economy.

I am not saying we should focus on integrating the region and concentrate less on our own development. Instead, the development of the region should be incidental to the development of Ghana. After all, we have nothing to lose if that happens. A strong regional body – similar to the EU – puts both the region and countries within the region at par when negotiating trade agreements and economic policies with the rest of the world. The concerns of the members of the region and the region as a whole will not only be heard but also taken into account. So on this 53^rd Independence Day of Ghana, I reiterate Dr. Nkrumah's statement with a slight modification – "the independence of Ghana is meaningless unless it is linked up to the total economic liberation of West Africa".

Happy Independence!!!

Written and Edited by:

Kow A. Essuman Esq.

LL.B. Hons (Westminster), PgDip (BPP), LL.M. (Cornell)

Barrister-at-Law (Lincoln's Inn)

Attorney and Counselor-at-Law (New York)

All comments, corrections and contributions should be sent to kaessuman@yahoo.com.

This note is based on the thoughts, observations and opinions of Kow A. Essuman Esq. Any attempt to reproduce all or any part of this article without the express permission of the above named person shall be an infringement of intellectual property laws; following which the author reserves the right to commence an action/suit against any such person(s) or body for breach of copyright and/or any other action/suit the author sees fit.

The Apple - HTC Beef

2010-03-03T17:46:00.002Z

This brand new beef in the tech world promises to be one of the biggest ever if not the biggest. I woke up to the news that Steve Jobs, the C.E.O. of Apple, had expressed some concerns over HTC's recent products. His concerns in summary were that, though he appreciated competition, HTC was infringing on Apple's patents. His concerns have been translated into complaints filed with the US International Trade Commission and a district court in Delaware. You may wonder why Apple, a California company, will file a complaint in Delaware. Well, Delaware is like the Silicon Valley of the corporate world and all the big corporate wars are fought there. Again, which is why I am positive this beef promises to be one of biggest if not the biggest.

So why am I interested in this beef? Well, I'll give you two reasons. Firstly, besides being an international lawyer with expertise in commercial litigation, I come from a generation where the average person owns an mp3 player and a smart phone. In my case, it gets more interesting because my smart phone is manufactured by HTC (HTC HD2) and my mp3 player is manufactured by Apple (Ipod). Secondly, you rarely hear Apple complain that its patents have been infringed on (at least in recent times). The headlines always read Apple is being sued for some patent infringement. I'll give you a few examples. At the moment, Apple is defending a suit brought by Fujitsu with regard to Apple's just launched iPad. Apple is also battling Nokia in the courts over touch screen patent infringement. Also, a few years back when the iPhone was released by Apple, it had to settle out of court with Siemens for patent infringement.

So what does Steve Jobs and Apple hope to achieve with this lawsuit? An injunction preventing HTC's infringing products from the US market. For readers who don't know, HTC is manufactured in Taiwan. So should Apple succeed in obtaining this injunction, HTC's market outside the US will not be affected. But will this happen, is the question on the minds of all commercial litigators? The stakeholders of HTC are key players in the tech world: Microsoft Windows Mobile, Google Android, Google and T-Mobile.

Again, I reiterate that this will be one of the biggest if not biggest beef in the tech world. Watch this space!

Written & Edited by

Kow A. Essuman Esq.

LL.B. Hons (Westminster); PgDip (BPP); LL.M. (Cornell).

Barrister-at-Law (Lincoln's Inn); Attorney & Counselor-at-Law (New York).

http://www.linkedin.com/in/kowessuman

Sent from my HTC HD2 device.

My People And Reductions...

2010-03-01T12:03:00.002Z

As I sat in the partner's office listening to this couple explain their nightmare to the partner, all I could think of was, "why didn't you instruct a lawyer in the first place?". Only one answer made sense - "We're Ghanaian and we would rather do it ourselves than to pay a fellow Ghanaian to assist us". Interesting is what I thought.

After they had told the partner the entire story, it was agreed that an appeal will be lodged or a re-application. I was then asked by the partner to look at the file and the supporting evidence carefully to see if any action we take will be supported by law. Before the couple left, they offered to give me something small in cash or kind but I declined.

I spent the afternoon reviewing the documents they had submitted and realised that there was a problem. I looked up the law and found a solution. I discussed this solution with the partner who had no idea that this solution existed. He agreed and encouraged me to proceed in that direction. I telephoned the couple and arranged a meeting for the following day.

They turned up late as I expected after telephoning several times that they were on their way. As they sat before me listening to how I intended to proceed with their issue, all I could think about was discussing my fees. Eventually, the opportunity arose and I told them what I would charge. I spelt out my fees boldly and with a straight face. They nodded in agreement. I thought to myself 'whew, that was easy'. But boy was I wrong.

Happy that they were willing to pay me to carry out the service, I continued to advise them regarding their matter and the new application I intended to make on their behalf. As I explained that I would require at least half of my fees before I did any work, the wife said with a smile and in a Ghanaian language, 'brother, we beg you, reduce your fees for us'. Immediately she said that, the husband followed suit and included 'I wanted to ask you to reduce it but I couldn't'. I smiled nicely and said 'I would if I could but my hands are tired because it is the firm's policy. If they wanted any reduction, they would have to speak to the partner.'

I told them I would get in touch and once my fees had been partly paid, I would commence work. In the mean time, I asked them to bring me further evidence.

Written & Edited by

Kow A. Essuman Esq.

LL.B. Hons (Westminster); PgDip (BPP); LL.M. (Cornell).

Barrister-at-Law (Lincoln's Inn); Attorney & Counselor-at-Law (New York).

http://www.linkedin.com/in/kowessuman

Sent from my HTC HD2 device.

Sharing is a two way street

2010-02-14T15:17:00.002Z

It's funny how those closest to us are the ones who are most likely to hurt us. Even worse is the fact that the pain they cause us is usually greater than the pain we usually experience from being hurt by someone else. There have been many theories explaining why this is the case but there is only one which makes sense to me. And that is, the ones closest to us know us like the back of their hands. They know all our dirty secrets and all our weakness. They know what makes us happy and what makes us sad. In a nutshell, the hold the key to putting a smile on our faces and the key to wiping the same smile off our faces. So then what do we do to make sure this doesn't happen or even if it does happen, that it happens less often. Answer - we keep ourselves to ourselves. Yeah right! Like that will be easy. As humans, burdens are lifted when we share our problems with each other hence the saying: "a problem shared is a problem solved". Or something like that. We can't keep everything bottled up inside. It will eat us up. What we can do is be cautious about who we share these problems. Of course your reaction to that statement will be, "I don't share my problems with just anyone". So then my question to you is, "do you share your problems with someone who shares their problems with you?". If your answer to that is no then you have yourself to blame when your business is out in the public. If your answer to that is yes then you can be rest assured, to some extent, that the person you are sharing your problems with, is less likely to put your business out there in public since you have at your disposal, information about them that the public has no knowledge of. It is a two way street.

Written & Edited by

Kow A. Essuman Esq.

LL.B. Hons (Westminster); PgDip (BPP); LL.M. (Cornell).

Barrister-at-Law (Lincoln's Inn); Attorney & Counselor-at-Law (New York).

http://www.linkedin.com/in/kowessuman

Sent from my HTC HD2 device.

My Review of Calvin Klein Crave Eau de Toilette Spray 75ml

2010-01-03T11:32:00.001Z

Originally submitted at Fragrance Direct

Crave by Calvin Klein is a fresh, clean and sexy fragrance for the modern man who knows what he wants and how to get it. Defined by woody notes, sensual musk and sizzling spices.

Wonderful Scent

By chix from London on 1/3/2010

Pros: Great Smell

Best Uses: Everyday

Describe Yourself: Professional

I fell in love with the container! State of the art bottle.

(legalese)

“Asesa Anaa” (Review of 2009) by Kow Essuman

2010-01-01T22:58:00.003Z

I apologise for the delay in bringing this review. I expected someone else to do it but no one seems to be concerned about a review as I am. So this is a review by me and not anyone else; so no one should tell me what I left out or question why I focussed on what I focussed on. Now that we have that out of the way, I don't intend to dwell on every single thing that occurred in 2009. Just the things I found to be headline material, at least in my opinion. So please feel free to comment, criticise and most important of all, ENJOY!

The highlight at the beginning of 2009 was the swearing in of our president, His Excellency Professor John Evans Atta-Mills. He emerged victorious after one of the tensest and most anxious election run-off the world of politics had ever witnessed. His campaign catch word – "Yeresesamu" – had been accepted by many including members of other political parties. The jubilation following his success was one worth sitting back and enjoying as all manner of persons kept repeating the catch word – "Yeresesamu". I wonder whether a year later if "Asesa Anaa". And if it has, is it in the direction they expected? Hold your tongues and answer after reading the entire note.

The swearing-in ceremony didn't go as smoothly as one would have expected after such a victory. Our new president stumbled and nearly fell as he attempted to walk in the attire he had chosen to wear on this grand day. He was unable to take the oath properly even though he had a copy of the oath in his hand; and the kind Chief Justice (oh bless her soul) read it out slowly. He kept mumbling and inserting phrases which weren't there. Many Ghanaians were infuriated by this and they were right to be infuriated. I completely agree with such fury. The Oath of Presidency is a solemn declaration to defend the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana and as such should be taken with all seriousness. It was suggested that he should retake the oath. Correct me if I am wrong but that never happened. Could that be the reason behind the abuse of power in his first year? I'm only asking because in some cases, the Constitution has been put aside and so has the rule of law.

Anyway, we thought it was a one-off or at least hoped it was. But we were so wrong as the mumbling and insertion and/or addition of words to the English language has been repeated throughout his first year as a president. To be fair, Obama messed up his oath too but it wasn't as bad as President Mills. Yet he retook the oath so why couldn't President Mills? Further, President Mills' acceptance speech had no particular agenda for the country. There was no outline as to how his administration intended to manage the affairs of the country for the next four years or should I say eight years. Could it be because he and the NDC had no agenda for Ghana? Maybe except an oil-related agenda. This could be the reason why there has been nothing to be proud of in his first year. Nevertheless, he revised his catch word and said, "Yeresesamu na y'ako y'anim". Has any of this happened in the first year? Again, hold your tongues and answer after reading the entire note.

It took me a while to get familiar with the fact that Development in Freedom had been kicked out of office and that the NDC was back in power. We saw the resurrection of the 64 Infantry Battalion we thought no longer existed. For those who are not familiar with the 64 Infantry Battalion, it is the lawless section of the Ghana Armed Forces popular referred to as commandoes during the Rawlings era. Yes they were back and stormed the Castle seizing cars and halting the running of the civil service. Amongst the cars seized was the car of Nana Addo (NPP's presidential candidate in the 2008 election).

The former president, John Kufuor, was no stranger to this humiliation. He took home six cars: three of which were bullet-proof luxury cars and the other three non-bulletproof luxury cars. They were all BMWs. He was paid a visit by the infamous "car seizers". They left with three cars: two bullet proof vehicles and one non-bulletproof car. I have never understood why they didn't take all six cars if they were that important or why they didn't leave with the three bullet proof cars if it was that necessary. These people returned at a later date and further humiliated the former president saying he was holding onto government property. Government property they could have taken on their first visit. He was later given cars way below the luxury ones he enjoyed. There was also an issue with his office but I won't go into the details.

One of President Mills' campaign promises was to have a lean government. Not only did he appoint mediocre members of government but his government was far from lean. He put a freeze on the civil service and single-handedly suspended the ex gratia package approved by Parliament to be paid to the former president Kufuor (See Ex-Gratia - Mills' Suspension of the Package is Ultra Vires and Unconstitutional or Ex-Gratia - Mills' Suspension of the Package is Ultra Vires and Unconstitutional). I believe President Mills was under public pressure to suspend the ex gratia package. To be honest, given the economy of Ghana and the content of ex gratia package, the public outcry was justified. But with everything, there are laws regulating its implementation and suspension. Nonetheless, President Mills suspended the ex gratia and asked the newly sworn Council of State to review it. Both acts were unconstitutional though taken in good faith. (See Ex-Gratia - Mills' Suspension of the Package is Ultra Vires and Unconstitutional or Ex-Gratia - Mills' Suspension of the Package is Ultra Vires and Unconstitutional).

President Mills asked for 100 days to implement his campaign promises. One of which was to reduce fuel prices for the citizens of Ghana. This was a noteworthy promise as many electorates voted for him in the run-off elections based on this promise. As the 100 days neared, we saw the fuel prices dropped. Yeah right! In about a couple of weeks, fuel prices were up again past the price it was sold at prior to the drop. Speak of taking Ghanaians for a ride. Later in the year, fuel prices were increased again when world prices for fuel remained the same. Not only were fuel prices increased, there was a shortage of fuel in the country for some time. Also, in the first 100 days, the Budget was read during which the word "ECOMINI" was invented. The President also made it known to Parliament and Madam Speaker that it was difficult to translate the millions into "OPIPIPIIPIIPI".

2009 saw the "Cobwebs in my Head" beef between Ato Kwamena Dadzie and Koku Anyidoho. There was also unrest in the NDC camp between the Ahwois and Dr. Ekwow Spio Garbrah. Rawlings never hesitated to criticise Mills on how slow he was dealing with issues. NPP had its problems as well. Everyone came out with their theory as to why the Elephant was chased into the bush. I had to use that phrase. There have been further divisions within the party: the Kufuor faction and the Nana Addo faction. Thankfully, former president Kufuor stated that he didn't have any faction and was hoping that the party could move forward in unity. There were proposals to revise the NPP constitution and to limit the number of presidential candidate nominees. Dr. Arthur Kennedy wrote a number of articles and published a book – "Chasing the Elephant into the Bush" – highlighting why the NPP lost and suggesting ways they could win in 2012. Boy did he get a telling off from his party members.

The Asantehene celebrated a decade on the throne and invited former heads of state including the former president Jerry John Rawlings. The ceremony was grand with the golden stool being carried around the streets of Kumasi.

Welcome to Ghana, Barack Obama. His first trip to sub-Saharan Africa was to Ghana and not his father's land Kenya. Why? President Obama wanted to highlight Ghana's young democracy. And he did. It was beautiful to see all the former presidents (Rawlings and Kufuor) together with Obama and Mills. In the build up to Obama's arrival, all most of us prayed for, was that President Mills would not mess up Obama's name and refer to him as President Omama or even Osama. In an interview with VOA, he slipped up and referred to President Obama as President Omama. (Clip available here: Mills Blunders - "Omama, Confinent, Sacred Obrigation, Abilitiluu"). In my opinion, the entire visit was beautiful and contrary to popular criticism, I think it was well organized. His visit gave former president Rawlings the opportunity to rant about what was on his mind. He kept repeating that Kufuor rigged the 2004 election and attempted to rig the 2008 one but was warned by Nigerian generals against rigging the 2008 elections. I leave that to you to judge.

The Attorney-General, Mrs Betty Mould-Iddrisu, too had her share of defeats in 2009. Open-shut cases any lawyer would have been able to determine were frivolous, she didn't. Instead, she ran to court every single time hoping to score political points forgetting that her legal reputation was being dragged into mud. In fact, I am confident of standing up in court against her. A bit corky but true. The seizure of a passport without a court order was against the freedom of movement of a citizen of Ghana. Asabee was prevented on two occasions from taking a vacation with his family. Details of circumstances surrounding his arrest and detention can be read here: Issues Surrounding the Arrest and Detention of Asabee by the BNI or Issues Surrounding the Arrest and Detention of Asabee by the BNI.

Rawlings never hesitated to refer to the Kufuor administration as the most corrupt administration ever. His favourite words were "Probity and Accountability". And then Mabey and Johnson hit, naming members of his administration in one of the most corrupt scandals ever. Honourably, those involved who were also members of the Mills administration, resigned. Speaking of corruption, not too long into the Mills administration did the Muntaka scandal surface. He was forced to resign and cried that his party neglected him at a time when he needed them. I wonder why he thought they would stand by him. It's NDC – zero tolerance for corruption.

On the "ecomini" front, I mean, the economy front, there has been worse and no good. Ghana's stock exchange went from the best to the worst according to Bloomberg. At present the GH Cedi is approximately 1.45 US Dollars. Remember the GH Cedi was greater than the US Dollar at some point and during the time of the election the exchange rate was 1 GH Cedi = 1.1 US Dollar. I don't intend to go into the fine details of the economy but I urge you to ask the ordinary Ghanaian who voted if things are better or worse or the same. If the answer is not the first option i.e. better, then President Mills and the NDC deceived Ghanaians in their quest for power. Can we trust them with the oil money?

As the year drew to an end, the Ghana @ 50 Probe Committee published its report. It indicated that some former government officials could be prosecuted but emphasized that prosecution was not the objective of the Committee. The Committee hoped that the same mistakes will not be repeated by subsequent government officials. The Attorney-General had a different view to the report. She came out to say 2010 will witness the aggressive prosecution of the named former government officials in the report. My first reaction was: is this woman serious? With all the other criminal activities going on the country, which are of interest to the public and the general safety of Ghanaians, she is concerned about prosecuting former government officials connected with the Ghana @ 50 celebrations.

Has she quickly forgotten her significant losses in court in 2009? Maybe Amina Rawlings should be Attorney-General. (Congratulations to her on getting called to the Ghana Bar in October 2009). I'll have some faith in her as a fellow Lincoln's Inn barrister and at least, I know her Very Competent grade from Bar School in England puts her in a better position to serve Ghana's interest when it comes to deciding which cases to take to court. The current Attorney-General seems to have forgotten court procedures and evidence. The report is nothing but hearsay. It holds no weight in a court of law though it is a persuasive document. She should get her priorities right or be replaced by Amina.

I applaud the Minister for Information for getting with the times. She got herself a facebook account so she could be accessed and also keep internet users abreast with what her government has to offer. I wonder why she hasn't accepted my friend request since she joined. Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa also did well informing the public whenever an issue arose. His recent assignment was "the corrupting hampers" which were intended gifts for the President. I must say President Mills took a bold step in rejecting the hampers and a bolder step in citing the reason for rejecting them as corruption. Many people have had their opinions about that so I reserve mine.

In the very last days, we lost Uncle Dan a.k.a. "Domestication" – May his soul rest in peace as his contribution to Ghanaian politics will be forever remembered. In 2010, I pray for good health for President Mills. This is particularly important because his job is a very stressful one. Making sure members of his administration are in tune with his agenda (if there is indeed one) for Ghana is no easy task. I pray God gives him the wisdom to carry out all the promises he has for Ghana. I encourage him to remain open to ideas, listen to good counsel and take the right decisions to put Ghana on the right track. I implore him to put the interest of Ghana ahead of his own interest and/or the interest of his party or even specific members of his party.

He should reduce the number of committees set up for every single thing because 2009 saw a record number of committees for anything and everything. It appeared the committees were set up to run the bill of the country up through breakfasts, lunches and dinners. We could have done without many of them. Finally, the BNI should stick to their constitutional duties such as preventing Nigerians on "no-fly" lists from buying tickets in Accra rather than harassing civilians on a daily basis.

I think these are the most important things that happened in 2009. Again, I reiterate that it is my opinion; so don't accuse me of deliberately ignoring a headline or purposely including a headline. Now you have a chance to answer the question I have been posing all throughout this review. Has "Yeresesamu" translated to "Asesa Anaa"? If it has, was it as you (or the ordinary Ghanaian) expected. Be honest with yourself. All the best in the New Year and I hope 2010's review will have more positive news than this. God bless you and God bless Ghana!

Written and Edited by:

Kow A. Essuman Esq.

LL.B. Hons (Westminster), PgDip (BPP), LL.M. (Cornell)

Barrister-at-Law (Lincoln's Inn)

Attorney and Counselor-at-Law (New York)

All comments, corrections and contributions should be sent to kaessuman@yahoo.com.

This review is based on the thoughts, observations and opinions of Kow A. Essuman Esq. Any attempt to reproduce all or any part of this article without the express permission of the above named person shall be an infringement of intellectual property laws; following which the author reserves the right to commence an action/suit against any such person(s) or body for breach of copyright and/or any other action/suit the author sees fit.

An Objective Analysis of the Overdraft Fees Case

2009-11-28T13:40:00.001Z

Sometime during this week, Wednesday (November 25, 2009) to be exact, the new Supreme Court of England and Wales handed down a favourable decision to the banks and building society that had been battling in the country's courts with the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) in the last couple of years. I don't know how familiar readers are with that case. The main issue had to do with the fairness of overdraft fees being charged by the banks and building society. Now this was test case meaning no one was suing anyone except the OFT wanted the question - whether the OFT could assess the fairness of the overdraft fees - answered. The OFT won in the High Court and Court of Appeals. Or should I say the banks and building society lost in the High Court and Court of Appeals. Either way, both the High Court and Court of Appeals thought the OFT could assess the fairness in the overdraft fees. When the decision was handed down by the learned Law Lords of the Supreme Court, many websites and media outlets described the decision as a big blow to millions of consumers/customers. Why? Well these millions of customers/consumers were owed some money as a result of the High Court and Court of Appeal rulings. But their refunds had to be put on hold as the case progressed through the justice system. Now with this ruling, they get zero. Harsh? Not really if you ask me. Bear in mind I have an overdraft to pay as well. Now these banks and building society charge around £39 as overdraft fees per transaction when in fact they spend under £3 pounds when a transaction occurs involving a consumer's/customer's overdraft. You may view this as unfair and rightly so which was why this test case was brought. Now the banks and building society make around £2.6 billion from these overdraft fees. If the OFT are allowed to assess the fairness of those fees and subsequently those fees are reduced significantly or eliminated, the banks and building society will seek to gain that £2.6 billion from other avenues which were originally free. For example, fees for having an account (regardless of the type), fees for all forms of transaction, fees for using the ATM (like in the US) and many other free services we take for granted on a daily basis. I encourage you to view this from an objective standpoint. An overdraft is spending money you don't have at a time you really need the money. Usually in a financial emergency. The bank then says fine, you can use some of our money but you will have to pay this amount of money as overdraft fees. The customers/consumers have a choice, either make sure you always have money in your account or be willing to pay whatever fees for using money which isn't yours to bail yourself out. Harsh as it may sound, it is the right way to go. In a time when people spend and spend without any discipline. I may have to pay my overdraft soon but I am absolutely in favour of leaving the fairness of the overdraft fees to the banks and building society.

History in SA 2010

2009-11-28T12:40:00.001Z

I am sure if you regularly visit this blog, you would have realised that the posts on here are far from consistent with each other. That is the point. Life has all these aspects to it and we shouldn't restrict ourselves to only one aspect. That said, let's return to this post. History is being made and all Africans or lovers of the continent and its culture should rise and support it. The next world cup is scheduled to be held on the continent. This is the first time the continent is hosting such a huge sporting event. That is history in itself. Something great is happening folks. I feel it in my bones. Lol. The continent's son is the first black president of the greatest nation on earth. [Like the first black president could have come from anywhere else.] And then Ghana wins the U-20 World Cup in 2009. [The first time ever with all sorts of records including top goal scorer.] And I must mention, Ghana won against all odds. I had to put that in. I hope you're beginning to sense where this is going. If not, pay attention. Ghana became one of the very first countries to comfortably qualify for the world cup in SA. Eventually, Cameroon, Nigeria, Cote d'Ivoire and Algeria joined the train. I accentuate the fact that this is the very first time Africa is being well represented on the world stage in football. Well if Egypt had qualified instead of Algeria we would have had Africa's perfect five. But the countries that have qualified thus far are the best in Africa. There should be no way none of these countries shouldn't make if to the finals and in fact win the cup (hopefully Ghana...LOL). The cup should remain in Africa for at least the next 4 years and because of that we need the 12th member of the team. Yes we need to rally behind each African team in the world cup and support them with all we've got, mainly with prayers. If you can attend the matches please do otherwise watch it on television and scream or yell or lose your mind (not literally). The world cup draw is December 4, 2009. Let's make history. I'm certain you will return to this post in August 2010 and agree that we made history.

More Labour Trouble

2009-11-24T20:05:00.000Z

Many were surprised when the news came that the Belgian Prime Minister, Herman Van Rompuy, had been unanimously elected as the first president of the EU Council. When I say many, I refer to many in the UK. This is because up until a month ago Mr. Blair stood unopposed. There wasn't a doubt that he would be the first president of the EU Council. What a blow this must have been for Mr. Blair and of course the Labour Party and his friend the Mr. Brown especially since we're currently in an election.

In my view, Mr. Blair happens to be one of best politicians Britain has ever seen or perhaps the world. I'm almost certain his dream of becoming the first EU president was properly orchestrated. He championed EU causes and other European causes whilst he was a PM, particularly in his last days.

It was during his tenure as prime minister that the 1998 Human Rights Act which introduced the European Convention of Human Rights in the UK was passed. I must emphasis that this has no relation to the EU. I mention it to prove Mr. Blair's dream for Europe. He championed EU causes like the constitution and further intergration of Europe. That is not to say that was a bad thing but Mr. Blair knew what he was doing.

When he finally left power to Gordon Brown, he became catholic and focussed on peace in the middle east. All this being part of his plan to gather support for his candidacy. He changed to catholic because a significant majority of Europe belong to the catholic faith. He was lecturer for religion and law at Yale whilst I was at Cornell. Pushing for peace in the middle east (though a good thing) demonstrates his foreign relation abilities whilst ensuring that the interest of Europe is maintained in that area.

So up until a month ago, Mr. Blair stood unopposed. Then suddenly his support seemed to disappear after all countries had agreed to the idea an EU president. France and Germany changed from "support for Mr. Blair" to "we think the person shouldn't be a very popular person". Mr. Brown maintained his support for his long time friend. Of course he would. Why wouldn't he? If he lost the next election and Mr. Blair was EU president, Mr. Brown would have had a job of some sort. So now no EU job for Mr. Brown from his friend Mr. Blair.

Therefore he has to put more effort in this election campaign. Though both may not be related, a loss to Mr. Blair (Labour's most popular politician) may be viewed as a rejection of Labour at the EU stage. This definitely has a negative impact on the Labour Party at home. Also, with Harriet Harman, one of Labour's popular politicians at present, facing criminal charges, there is nothing but more trouble in the Labour Party.

Alicia Keys - Try Sleeping With A Broken Heart

2009-11-22T16:25:00.002Z

My favourite song for the last three weeks. Alicia Keys at it again. And I'm sure I'll still love it a year or two from now. Enjoy.

The So Called Porn Movie

2009-11-21T16:02:00.008Z

I just finished watching the movie that has caused debate amongst Ghanaian circles in the diaspora. Yes, I watched Heart of Men. After seeing the trailers, I vowed never to watch that movie. However, I watched another promo trailer as the premiere of the movie in the UK got closer. That got me curious to the extent that I wanted to attend the premiere.

Luckily, as always, a friend had the DVD. I made countless efforts to obtain this DVD but because of our professional conflicts, all efforts proved futile. To cut a long story short, she told me I could watch it online. So I did. I spent my Saturday morning watching the Heart of Men.

Before I go on, I admit it was a brilliant movie far from the pornography that was displayed in the trailers and promo posters. The plot was wonderful. I loved every bit of the movie. Unlike most African movies where the ending becomes obvious after five minutes into the movie, I had to get to the end of the movie to understand what was happening.

The setting was brilliant. The cast were so professional. I can't believe I am singing this amount of praises about a movie I was so ashamed to claim was Ghanaian. In fact, I am proud it was a Ghanaian production. Ok maybe I am getting ahead of myself. But it was a very engaging movie from start to the end dealing with all sorts of issues that affect young people on a daily basis. I related to more than one of the issues (don't ask me which). Lol.

I also praise the fact that they included the Northern regions of Ghana which are usually left out in everything. The sex scenes were professional for African standards. It was not at all revealing. I now understand why the British Board of Film Classification gave it a rating of 15. In my opinion, this movie is far from any kind of porn.

I am not saying this movie is a perfect movie. It definitely has its flaws. The role played by Richie was that of a Barrister and being a Barrister myself, it was easy to identify those flaws. I am sure doctors and police officers will also be able to identify the flaws in those areas that were portrayed in the movie.

In the future, I wish the script writers or whoever is responsible will be briefed about the proper roles of the actors. Firstly, Kay was tried in the Supreme Court in Accra and found guilty. The Supreme Court is not a trial court so no one can be tried and found guilty in the Supreme Court. Secondly, lawyers for Kay said they will appeal. How can you appeal from the Supreme Court? That is the final court in the land.

Another flaw I found was Kay waking up in Upper West and speaking twi with the lady. I am almost certain twi isn't spoken in that area. They should have spoken hausa or something and given an English interpretation.

Besides all that, I think it was a brilliant movie and everyone one should see it. I recommend it and may post it on my blog. From Scorned to the Perfect Picture to Heart of Men, I believe Ghanaian movies are slowly meeting international standards. I am aware of two other movies to be released and I look forward to their success. Well done to all persons in the Ghanaian movie industry. You've made me proud.

Find the movie below and enjoy:

Heart of Men Part 1a

Heart of Men Part 1b

Heart of Men Part 2a

Heart of Men Part 2b

Parents Just Don't Listen

2009-11-13T20:00:00.001Z

I'm sure I'm not the only person who has experienced this. When you tell your parents or even older folk something you know is very right and all the facts point in your favour and they still insist that they are right. Eventually, when they find out they're wrong they deny they said what they said. Even more annoying is when they claim to have said what you said. Maybe, it's the African culture. We're brought up to think the older person is always right even when they're wrong. I remember when I was young, an uncle of mine was saying something which was completely wrong. Especially, since he wasn't present when the event took place. I called him out on it and in the presence of everyone, he asked me 'are you calling me a liar'. How was I supposed to respond to that? Of course I said he was right. Parents always use the 'I'm older and more experienced' card anytime they are challenged on whether what they are saying is right or wrong. I agree older and experienced make a person wiser but sometimes listening to the young ones and taking on board their point of view strengthens the wisdom. They may decide not to take on the points raised but the idea of them considering it shows the young ones that they listen. We can only hope they accept their mistakes.

In the 24th Year

2009-11-10T19:52:00.004Z

I turned 24 last Saturday. I received so many wishes on Facebook to the extent that I had to put a disclaimer as my status. To be honest, I am still saying thank you to the kind people who made my day one of the best in the year. So, just in case you didn't know and couldn't wish me a happy one, now you do. Wishes and gifts are still being accepted. Gifts can be in the form of cash donations to my Paypal Account. Lol. Nah seriously. Anyway, I kissed 23 goodbye and entered the 24th year of my life. I was and remain forever grateful to God for the favour he has shown me in the 23 years of my life. His final favour and grace was in relation to the New York State Bar Exam. Two days before my birthday (5th November, 2009) I received good news that I had passed the New York State Bar Exam. What a birthday present? In 23 years of my life, I have been an academic and professional success. Being modest and with every ounce of humility in my intentions, I shall mention a few. With 9 ones from Morning Star School to Prempeh College (the Kings' College) to Holborn College to study a Foundation in Law course (awarded best student on the course). Then to the University of Westminster. In my third year and with second year results, I applied and was accepted to pursue a Master of Laws (LL.M.) degree at both Cornell University (Ivy League School) and Fordham Law School, both in the State of New York. I was also accepted to King's College, London and University College, London to pursue the same programme. I applied and was accepted onto the Bar Vocational Course (BVC) at the best Bar School in England and Wales, BPP Law School as well as the College of Law. I graduated from Westminster with an Upper Second Class Honours Bachelor of Laws (LL.B. Hons) degree. I subsequently completed the BVC with a Very Competent (the second highest grade). I was called to the Bar of England and Wales by the Honourable Society of Lincoln's Inn in July 2008 earning the title of Barrister-at-Law. Then I went to Cornell Law School and graduated with an LL.M. degree in May 2009. Following which I sat the New York State Bar Exam in July 2009. The results of that exam as I mentioned earlier, was successful. That so far is a summary of God's blessings in the 23 years of my life. At the moment, I'm part of the unemployed population in the world despite all these qualifications. You can imagine my frustration. But a reflection of the blessings in the last 23 years reassure me of more to come if I continue to put my faith in God. There is no better way to celebrate a birthday than to reflect and I hope in 360 days from today I can add more blessings to the above.

Bailout, bailout, bailout...Restructuring

2009-11-04T22:23:00.002Z

I'm sure I'm not the only person who got interested in the economy, particularly in these times. My interest in the economy and finance actually started before this mess. I was amongst those sucked into the stock bubble (i.e. those who thought stocks only rose). I called stock trading the rich man's lottery. Because honestly it was a gamble. How could one be sure that the stock they purchased for $10 will be $15 dollars at the close of the trading day? Lots of factors had to swing in one's favour for that to happen and it was someone's job to predict risers and fallers on the stock exchange so maybe it isn't a lottery. Ah call it what you want I still think it is the rich man's lottery. So I got sucked in before all this mess so you can imagine how pissed I am to realise my investment has been a loss. But everything happens for a reason right? And I guess the reason was that I became interested in the market.

So then financial institution after financial institution started collapsing. People were withdrawing money out of their accounts like there was no tomorrow. Ok maybe not like that but investors were worried about investing. Then the government decided to step in because the banks decided to stop lending or at least slow it down and because the banks were "too big to fail". The banks (institutional investors) had made more losses than anyone could have imagined. In England, the government had to step in to save Northern Rock after it failed to find a buyer for the bank. Then it bailed out the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and Lloyds TSB and HBOS (Lloyds). Billions of pounds of tax payers money was used to bail out these banks. So it is only right the tax payer knows what is going on with these banks that were bailed out with its money and also whether the money used to bail out these banks will ever be returned to the tax payer (we know this never gets into the tax payer's account or pocket). An on-going debate in parliament for about a month was restructuring the financial system domestically and internationally. Brown argued that if this wasn't done internationally, then all banks will do is move where the rules are relaxed. Also, separating investment banking from retail/commercial banking was not the answer as both types of banks failed in the last year (Northern Rock and Lehman Brothers).

Then in a week, the good news comes. The EU Commission agrees to the restructuring of Northern Rock. The bank will now be split into a good bank and a bad bank. Just like the name, the good bank will have all the good assets of the bank i.e. the good loans and mortgages whilst he bad bank will have all the toxic assets such as the soured loans. The government will then find buyers for both banks. You may ask yourself, who will buy the bad bank? I would if I had money and for very very very cheap too. I don't think the government will have a strong negotiation position with regards to the price of the bad bank. The good bank, of course, will have a good price. More good news comes this week when the Commission further orders a shake-up of RBS and Lloyds. Basically, RBS will have to sell its lucrative insurance business including Direct Line, Churchill and Green Flag as well as 318 branches. Further, it will sell its NatWest brand in Scotland, RBS Insurance and Global Merchant Services, its card payment business. Lloyd on the other hand must sell 600 branches, TSB, its mortgage lender Cheltenham & Gloucester, and the Intelligent Finance online bank.

I totally agree with this shake up. Virgin and Tesco have been tipped to take advantage of all this restructuring. And why shouldn't they? Some analysts have said that Lloyds have had it easy compared to RBS. Really? All that money that was pumped into RBS? RBS definitely deserves this shake up. They can't eat their cake and have it. Others are worried that the big banks will be back in five years to buy them up. Everything is a cycle, ain't it?

Jay-Z feat. Alicia Keys - Empire State of Mind

2009-11-01T03:05:00.002Z

This happens to be one of my favourite tracks on Jay-Z's Blueprint 3 album. And also, I love Ms. Keys. I've loved her since her first single - Falling. Those corn-row braids. I miss New York and I hope the Yankees go on to win the world series.

Rights and Responsibilities – A Birdie Story (Part 2)

2009-10-28T12:31:00.002Z

Third encounter: In preparation for my call ceremony to the Bar, I had to sign the Bar Register. I went over to Lincoln's Inn to do this. As I walked on the terrace, I saw a few people on the stairs leading to the library and the stairs leading to the walkway. A little bird lay on the ground close to the stairs leading to the walkway. I made nothing of it as it is normal for people to watch a little bird learning to fly. I had ear buds in my ear with the music blazing so loudly. I was in my own world. As I got close to where this little bird lay I saw a white seagull flying towards me from the heights of the Lincoln's Inn building. Again I thought nothing of it. The girls on the stairs started waving frantically at me. I proceeded to remove one ear bud so I could hear them. Just as I did that, the seagull got closer and missed me narrowly. That's when I realised what was going on. The little bird who lay on the ground was the offspring of the seagull that attacked me and the little bird was learning to fly. As I was figuring this out, the seagull had turned around and was heading my way again. This time from behind. It missed me again but this time I felt its wings flap so hard. I ducked slightly and that was enough. But why me? There were other people in the open especially, those standing around the little bird. I hurried inside to do what I had to do. When I got out everyone had disappeared including the little bird. And they weren't eaten by the seagull.

I thought that was the end of the seagull attacks on me. Boy was I wrong. A couple of days later, I had to go to Lincoln's Inn again to sort out my seating and some payments. Again, I walked on the terrace. I honestly thought the attacks were over. The attack this day was worse than the one a couple of days earlier. I immediately realised I was under attack when I saw the bird dive straight at me making attacking noises. I ducked as hard as I could and it missed me. The seagull made the second attack whilst still mid-air instead of flying further and turning around. I ducked again and this time made for the door. I was shaking. It took me a while to catch my breath and explain to the receptionist why I was there. As I explained, a black man ran inside yelling "those seagulls have gone crazy". So then it wasn't just me. It wasn't a personal attack. Maybe it was a racial attack. Who knows? He had just reactivated my fear to return outside. I stood inside for another five minutes after I had been served. The receptionist asked whether there was anything else. To which I replied "oh no. It's raining outside". It was really raining. Lol. I went to the doorway aiming to make a dash for the stairs leading to the walkway instead of the terrace. Why? Because the walkway had trees providing shade and I knew there was no way the birds will attack that way. So immediately the rain calmed down I made a dash for the stairs and escaped.

As if I had not learned my lesson, I returned on Sunday for chapel service. When I got to the gate, I asked the porter what was wrong with the seagulls because I could hear the attack cries and he explained that they were brooding. It was brooding season. So I walked along the high wall to remain unseen until I got to the chapel. I didn't go for drinks with the benchers because that would require walking on the terrace and I might just be the unlucky one.

On my numerous trips to Brighton, I saw these seagulls again. Except this time they were bigger and it was not brooding season. I was told they are such a nuisance, in that, they swoop down and steal people's food. They are that brave. I attribute this bravery to all the rights they have. Yes they are a weaker species than we are but should we protect them to our own detriment? I mean what laws protects us from animals in the wild such as lions and tigers? Answer: the law of common sense. It is common sense that if a human being walks into lion pride he will be eaten without hesitation. Similarly, it is common sense that if an antelope fails to make a run for it if a pack of wild cats attack, it'll be the end of its life. Why shouldn't birds follow the same law of common sense all species follow in order to survive? I think the time has come for birds to know their natural place in this world. They have abused the rights we (humans) have given them by attacking us and defecating on our clothes and property. They need to face the consequences. At the moment, they enjoy rights without any responsibility whatsoever.

Please participate in the poll on the left hand side below the videos.

Rights and Responsibilities – A Birdie Story (Part 1)

2009-10-24T19:40:00.003+01:00

Why would anyone dislike birds? They are graceful creatures that beautify the skies. Sorry, I don't view them in that regard. They seem to have a personal vendetta against me so it's only right that I have one against them. It's the laws of nature - to every action is a reaction. And that should be the way it is. Where I come from, birds are a delicacy. They are hunted down and are proper game. They are very aware of their surroundings and try to avoid situations which will bring an end to their already limited life in a man's world. Or at least it used to be - it's a woman's world these days. Where I come from, birds don't have rights, they still recognise men as the dominant species. I don't care so much about they having rights except they should mind their business and I'll mind mine. I mean I can't sue a bird for common assault yet, I can't kill it when it attacks me in public. Such bollocks. So, where from this resentment? I have had three encounters with birds which were not very pleasing.

First encounter: I was on my way to college early one morning and as I waited at the bus stop, I felt something fall on the cap I was wearing. It was a brand new suede adidas cap I had just gotten from the US. I looked up to see if it was raining. The sky was clear without a single drop of rain. I proceeded to take off the cap guessing what could have fallen on it. I was shocked and disgusted to find the substance on my cap was bird crap. I looked up again for the culprit but this time, staying very clear from another hit. A pigeon posed on a branch way above me. I could have sworn it had a smirk on its little pigeon face. If it were any closer to me, I would have brought its life to an end that morning but it wasn't. I could return home to clean the cap but I cleaned it immediately I got to college.

Second encounter: I was on my way to Nottingham another early morning. I hadn't had any breakfast as I waited at the coach station at Victoria. I decided to get something to eat since the journey to Nottingham was a good four hours. I didn't think putting my stomach through such an experience was a good idea. So I got something I could have on the bus. The seats in the seating area around the gate I was waiting at were all occupied so I sat on my bag which had wheels underneath. The snacks I had gotten were in both hands as I sat. The gates opened for a split second and in flew a few pigeons. One pigeon flew directly at me as if it had no flight chart or was simply blind. In an attempt to duck and not have the pigeon collide with my face, the wheels underneath the bag moved and I fell flat on my butt. I sat on the floor with my arms raised because I was protecting my food. It was embarrassing. Even worse, an old lady walked up to me and tried to help me up. I told her I was fine and she said sorry. There was a beautiful girl who sat in the seating area watching me with an apologetic look as I struggled to get to my feet. That was one of the most embarrassing moments in my life.

God's Love Story

2009-10-21T13:14:00.002+01:00

Before I go on to tell this wonderful story, I need to make a few disclaimers. The title and the entire story are not works of mine. I read this in "Our Daily Bread" today and thought I'd share it with everyone - whether Christian or not. I think it makes a good story and spells out the concept of love, jealousy and cheating I mentioned in earlier posts. If you're a Christian and/or interested in the Bible passage, have a look at Hosea 11. Finally, the author of the story is, Philip Yancey and it can be found on the October 21 page of the 2009 Annual Edition of Our Daily Bread.

Is there any feeling more powerful than that of betrayal? Ask a high school girl whose boyfriend has dumped her for a pretty cheerleader. Or tune your radio to a country-western station and listen to the lyrics of infidelity. Or check out the murders reported in the daily newspaper, an amazing number of which trace back to a quarrel with an estranged lover.

In the Old Testament, God through Hosea's marriage demonstrates in living color exactly what it is like to love someone desperately and get nothing in return. Not even God, with all His power, will force a human being to love Him.

Many people think of God as an impersonal force, something akin to the law of gravity. The book Hosea portrays almost the opposite: a God of passion and fury and tears and love. A God in mourning Israel's rejection of Him (11:8).

God the lover does not desire to share his bride with anyone else. Yet, amazingly, when Israel turned her back on God, He stuck with her. He was willing to suffer, in hope that someday she would return to Him.

Hosea, and later Jesus, prove that God longs not to punish but to love. In fact, He loved us so much that He sent His Son to die for us!

The Joy of Education

2009-10-19T17:28:00.002+01:00

I'm sitting on the bus taking my little cousin to school. Amongst my thoughts include what to blog about after taking a one week break. I like to take my blogging breaks right, lol. I really intended to blog all last week but certain issues kept me away from my keyboard lest I let out thoughts and feelings I couldn't later explain. Before my cousin and I got on the bus, I noticed a mother with a push chair or is it a pram. You know that moving thing they put those little things called babies in. And I am not talking about women either. There were also three young ones with the mother: two boys and a girl and a pizza place. Lol. No pizza place though. Initially, I thought the little ones and their mother were of Spanish descent. More Latino than from Spain, maybe Mexico or another country in Central or South America.

On the bus, the mother stays downstairs whilst the little ones come upstairs and sit right behind my cousin and me. They begin talking but I choose not to listen them. Then I think to myself. Sort of a personal observation. You can almost tell who goes to a public school and who doesn't. And you can also almost tell where public school pupils will end. How messed up could the system be? I drift out of my thoughts into the three little ones conversation. An interesting one I must say. They were talking about knowing their times table. I listened as each child said a number of times tables and also compare the times tables to find out the easiest and the most difficult. Their passion and dedication got me smiling.

Then I thought to myself, these children clearly attend a public school and if they can be this passionate about their education, who are we not to encourage them? In fact who am I to think I almost know where they will end up. As they got off the bus, I realised they were probably from Vietnam or around that area. Anyway, I continued to think - we should invest in education, make sacrifices for these young ones for I felt very happy hearing them speak about their times tables. And if these kids can be this passionate at this age then it is a good sign for many good things to come.

Relationships and the Level of Jealousy

2009-10-15T22:30:00.002+01:00

As I sat on the train yesterday on my way to Brighton, a story in the Evening Standard caught my attention besides the breakthrough in the health care plan in the US and the proposal to increase tuition at university. The story was about a wealthy city banker who killed his wife and was being asked by the court to pay the cost of prosecution. I then thought to myself: how jealous are we allowed to get in relationships? Was this man's jealousy extreme? If so, what is the level of jealousy one should expect and/or give in a relationship? Perhaps, a summary of the story should help.

The city banker found out his wife was cheating on him. He had recorded conversations between his wife and his wife's lover. A divorce was pending and he wanted to make sure the wife didn't get away with much so he hid most of his assets outside the jurisdiction of the courts. Why would he do this when his wife was equally rich? In fact, she was also a banker in the city. But that was not the source of her wealth. She inherited a wealthy legacy from her father. She was richer than her husband so why would he want to keep his assets from her? For starters, he was estimated to be worth over £800,000, he was earning at least £300,000 and his equity share in their home was worth at least £600,000. Also, in one of the recorded conversations, the wife told her lover that the divorce would be over soon and her husband would be responsible for the mortgage, child support and maintenance which will be 20% of his income. The husband was acquitted on the murder charge but convicted on the manslaughter charge because he did not intend to kill his wife. It then followed that he had to pay the prosecution costs of at least £300,000.

So was this banker's jealousy level justified? He went behind his wife's back and recorded conversations between his wife and his wife's lawyers. I know many girls or guys who would view that as a serious invasion of privacy. But would he had known what he knew if he didn't do that? There was a time when it was attractive for guys to be jealous when other guys were simply smiling at their women or their women passing comments about how handsome another guy looked. But with this, I think the banker took it too far when he strangled his wife during the argument. This could be a one a million case scenario. How about a couple scenarios?

First scenario: there is a couple who are so much in love. They've been through a lot to make sure their relationship works and it has so far because of the very strong foundation of trust they managed to build between them. However, the guy gets all worked up over the littlest things like when another guy calls his girlfriend at very odd hours and they talk for a long time. And in a tone the guy doesn't appreciate. He also gets worked up when she stays online talking to all these other guys and they say suggestive things to her. Because of the level of trust between them, his girlfriend always assures him not to worry because all the late night conversations, whether on telephone or internet, mean nothing. My question is: is it alright for the guy to get worked up and/or even jealous? Now imagine the girl begins to like another guy at her school/workplace and because of the trust between her boyfriend and her, she tells him about this guy she likes. Now is it alright for the boyfriend to get worked up and/or jealous?

Second scenario: there are three people involved. There is a couple who like each other a lot. The girl then likes this other guy. The first guy knows about the second guy and the fact that the girl he likes very much also likes the second guy. That is the level of honesty in this relationship. In fact it goes beyond that because anytime the girl visits the second guy he tells the first guy about the visit. Now should the first guy be jealous even though he knows all this about the second guy? Let's add a little twist to this scenario. Assuming the girl visited the second guy over the weekend and spent the night there. As always, prior to going there, she told the first guy about it and he didn't seem to have a problem. He then got curious a couple of days later and asked the girl about the weekend. In her defence, she accused the first guy of not trusting her. Again, I ask was the first guy being jealous when he asked questions about the weekend and if so, was he justified in doing so?

Like I always say, I am no relationship expert but to make a relationship work, both parties have to be willing to work very hard at it by making several sacrifices. I don't think jealousy should be absolutely kicked out of relationships. On the contrary, I think it is necessary for jealousy to exist in a relationship because it is only when your partner gets jealous, that you realise how important you are to him or her. What we can do to ensure that jealousy does not end up like the story I read in the Evening Standard is to make sure that we reassure our partners of our genuine commitment to them in every way possible. For instance in the first scenario, we can reassure our partners by limiting the conversations particularly at those odd times; severing the attraction to the other guy/girl by informing them of the inappropriateness of their comments and actions; and reminding them of your genuine commitment to your partner. Similarly, in the second scenario, we can reassure our partners of our genuine commitment to them by severing the attraction to the other guy/girl and ending the visitations to their place.

Love is one mystery of life I believe in and it should not be taken for granted if you're lucky to experience it.

The Standard of Cheating in Relationships

2009-10-02T15:52:00.003+01:00

"Please don't leave me", "I don't want to be with you", "but I love you" were the words that woke me up this morning. No, I didn't leave the television on when I went to bed and no, I wasn't having a bad dream that she was leaving me. Those were the words I heard above shouts and screams around 10:30am from my third floor window. I hurried to the window to catch a bit of the action, only to find a white couple hugging under a tree. Had they made up already? I doubted it. For a split second I thought a movie was being shot beneath my window so I quickly made sure there was no way the inside of my room could be seen knowing full well that I was only in tight boxer briefs and God knows I wouldn't want my business out like that.

I watched this couple for a little longer and in fact, that was all I needed to figure out why they were staging this wonderful romantic drama beneath my window to purposely wake me up. Lol, I do feel that important. The shouts and screams started again and this time the man added, "I'm going to call that man". "I didn't mean to do it", the woman said. That was all I needed folks. The woman had slept with a man and her boyfriend/fiancé/husband had found out and was leaving her. And she was crying after him beseeching him not to leave her for she loved him. How Shakespeare would have loved to witness this act. Or perhaps one of the movie directors in Hollywood or Nollywood and not Bollywood for we all know how their romance ends like – singing and dancing.

I think the man managed to get the other man on the phone and words were exchanged but I couldn't care any less. I just shut my windows, hopped back into bed and tried to crawl to sleep under the covers. Oh what a perfect way to start my day after a 5 hour sleep. I began to wonder whether this was worth blogging about because after yesterday's post, I had come up with other topics I intended to share with my readers. It got me thinking and my thoughts ventured – without a map and/or compass – into the realm of "cheating in relationships". A topic I'm sure everyone has thought about and talked about so I would expect the opinions and comments to flow like water.

When I ask many girls what they would do if their partners kissed or slept with someone else, they reply "I will leave him". And then I ask, but why, to which they reply "because he was cheating on me or he cheated on me". But did he really? I mean if at the end of the day he came back to you and decided you were the one he loved before he had the affair or he was a victim of circumstances, will that be cheating? Let it be clear that I am no relationship expert. So I looked up the word cheat and came up with two relevant definitions: to deceive someone and to be unfaithful i.e. to have a sexual relationship with somebody other than a spouse or regular sexual partner.

Let's try and break this down. I fail to see how having an affair is deceiving your partner. I guess it could be if they asked and you lied about it. But then again, what are you deceiving them about? The fact that you love them or the fact that you're having something to do with someone else? Call me old school but I am of the traditional view that relationships are based on love. So then if love is the basis of your relationship, how is it deception when your partner tells you they love you and they really do? I am sure you'll respond by saying if they love you, they wouldn't do what they did. Really? Love's based on that?

The second definition which speaks of having a sexual relationship with somebody other than a spouse or regular sexual partner is the reason most people tend to give. Again, call me old school but I am of the traditional view that relationships are based on love. If this definition had said having a relationship with another person other than your spouse, I would readily agree that that is cheating because of love as a basis for relationships. You can't fully love two people at the same time. There is the argument of loving two people at once – that is cheating too. But in this case, it doesn't say the basis of the relationship is love. The relationship outside the one with their spouse or sexual partner is a sexual relationship. Emphasis on sexual. That is all it is – sex. If that is what it is, how is that cheating?

The couple under tree made amends, I am sure, because even amidst the shouts and screams, they were hugging under a tree when I first saw them. Would I get back together with a girl who had an affair and I found out? Sure! Why not? As long as I am the one she's in love with and not the person she had the affair with. I've done so in the past so why wouldn't I? How about this, if it happened once and they told you about it before you found out, would you still leave? One thing I will agree to without hesitation is that the trust underlying the relationship will be deeply affected. It will be up to the defaulting partner to try and raise it back beyond the pre-existing level. This is when the non-defaulting partner may decide to take advantage of the situation. But if you really love each other you will work at it and it will only make your relationship stronger.

I feel it necessary and convenient to leave a disclaimer. Lol. If anyone who reads this hooks up with me and thinks because of what I said they can enjoy a non exclusive relationship solely on their part, don't be misled for I shall leave your ass quicker than passengers at a train station fleeing a bomb scare.

Just a few observations … Happy 49th Independence Day to all Nigerians

2009-10-02T00:08:00.001+01:00

So I get out of the shower and get on my laptop; spending time with my newly found love. I receive a text from a friend inviting me to attend a service with her at Temple Church. I reluctantly agree. I say reluctantly because it saddens me to leave my newly found love and not because I don't enjoy church. After all, I owed God a whole lot of gratitude after all he did for me in the past week. So I grabbed a blazer and pants (still in an empire state of mind) or trousers and made my way towards Temple Church.

I don't think I was expecting anything special on my journey to church except I was hoping to run into a barrister who would offer me a pupillage or a solicitor who would offer me a training contract or a judge who would offer a marshalling opportunity or perhaps, clerkship. A bad reason to go to church? Oh yes but I'm certain God understands. I was also interested in the theme of the service – An Annual Service Dedicating the Legal Year to God. I arrived at Lewisham station to find out the DLR was down. I got the national rail to London Bridge and then tried to figure out the rest of the journey from there. What happens to those mini tube maps when you need them the most?

I had to rely on my intuition and memory. Well many lines run through Bank so it was a safe choice. I got to Bank and got on the Circle Line. There is always a story to tell on the tube. Sorry to disappoint this time. Lol. But I tried out an observation. A week ago a friend of mine made an observation and I was curious to find the truth in that. Friend's observation - why do people on the bus and tube try to prevent you from reading the Metro and London Lite when they are clearly free newspapers. I mean you didn't pay for it so you're really not losing anything if someone reads it with you. With this in mind I was busily starring into the London Lite being read by fellow commuters. I was waiting for someone to turn away or shut the newspaper but they never did. It was like they were reading my mind. Oh I read attentively and with interest too. Lol. At one point, I nearly asked a fellow commuter to hold on as I wasn't done with that page until something else caught my eye.

I thought emails were meant to be personal messages. Oh yes my thoughts are justified alright otherwise what's the fuss with all the email protection software. I found myself looking over the shoulder of another commuter who was busily sending an email on her Blackberry. I could read the entire email. It said "…". You didn't think I read it. Come on, I'm a Lincoln's Inn gentleman. But seriously I realized how vulnerable we are with the influx of these Blackberrys and other smart phones. I don't even answer my phone on the bus or train because I assume someone is listening; whether actively or passively.

I got off the tube and out of the train station to wait on this friend of mine. Like every other girl she chose to arrive fashionably late. In the mean time, I obtained my own copy of the London Lite. I didn't even ask the vendor, I just picked it off the pile. Remember, free. Lol. I am sure most of you have seen the new Cadbury commercial (still in an empire state of mind) or advert. If not here is the link: new Cadbury advert. There was a full page dedicated to it in the London Lite. Well done Cadbury for choosing Ghana. She finally arrives and we head off to Temple Church. She observed one thing I am quite used to now – why are all these barristers and judges stuck up? I tried unsuccessfully to explain.

The address was very refreshing. It was based on Romans 3:10-26. I learned the bad news and the good news in that passage. Bad news – "there is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God (Romans 3:10-11) … there is no fear of God before their eyes (Romans 3:18)" and the good news is – "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus (Romans 3:23-24)". I did pay attention and I encourage you to apply this in your life. Temple Church looked marvellous. There were refreshments in the round church which is where they acted part of the "Da Vinci Code". So if you think about it, I was actually standing on set where Tom Hanks and that old guy were fighting.

Well, I had to leave so I said my goodbyes and left. We ended up getting the DLR from Tower Gateway. I got off at Poplar and changed at Canary Wharf to get the direct one to Lewisham. As I waited, I noticed two gay men kissing and touching. I looked away and never looked that way again. I can't judge them though because like the passage said we all have sinned and fall short of God's glory. I got on the train, started writing this piece until I finally arrived at Lewisham and had to dash for the bus. Running across Lewisham centre, I came across a dance group practising in front of the Lewisham shopping centre. I paused to enjoy it a bit and to catch my breath. I got the bus anyway. What an eventful evening though I nearly walked into a lamp post as I walked home from the bus stop. If I had the opportunity, I would do it all over again. Well, except seeing the gay men kiss and touch in public.

On another note, it is Nigeria's 49^th Independence Day today. I wished them a happy one on facebook and encouraged them to be rid of all the socio-political evils before they hit 50. I knew I was in for an attack but I didn't think it would come from someone so dear to me; who is not even Nigerian. Lol. I ended up removing the status and replacing it with Happy 49^th Independence Day to all Nigerians. So as Nigerians enjoyed this day it is my hope that they will take a firm stance in reducing corruption, bank scandals, 419s and violence. We need them to stand tall in the Region as Ghana cannot achieve the objective alone. Well it can but it'll take longer. I hope to say Happy 50^th Independence Day to all Nigerians next year with fewer faults to point out.

Finally, I read a piece from Ato Kwamena Dadzie today which was the highlight of my day. Here is the link: Mabey & Johnson: NDC porous defence. Do enjoy.

Issues Surrounding the Arrest and Detention of Asabee by the BNI

2009-08-14T12:33:00.007+01:00

Introduction

Just like everyone else, I woke up to the news that the former Minister for Information, Mr. Asamoah Boateng (Asabee), had attended the offices of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) after he had been prevented from travelling outside the country on a second occasion. I interpreted Asabee's action as cooperation with the BNI to resolve whatever issue was outstanding. Later on in the day, I found out Asabee had been arrested and detained. Asabee was the former honourable Member of Parliament for Mfantseman West and given my ties to that area, I am much obliged to put pen to paper in attempt to educate the ordinary Ghanaian on the issues surrounding his arrest and detention.
Before jumping into any discussion of the issues, I refer readers to Article (Art.) 35(1) of the 1992 Constitution (the Constitution) where it is stated that "Ghana shall be a democratic state dedicated to the realization of freedom and justice; and accordingly, sovereignty resides in the people of Ghana from whom Government derives all its powers and authority through this Constitution". And most importantly, Art. 35(4) which provides that, "the State shall cultivate among all Ghanaians respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms and the dignity of the human person".

Facts

The facts leading to Asabee's arrest and detention can be read on the myjoyonline website. (See http://news.myjoyonline.com/news/200908/33960.asp). According to his lawyer, Peter Okudzeto, Asabee was forcibly hounded into the BNI cell on Thursday, 13^th August 2009 at 18:30 GMT without any formal charge. Asabee voluntarily handed himself to the investigative body on Thursday morning following media reports that he was a fugitive of justice. He is under investigation for alleged malfeasance in the award of a contract to his sister-in-law for the refurbishment of the Ministry of Information last year.
Mr. Okudzeto narrated that they had waited for hours to see the director of BNI, only to be told later afternoon that they, the lawyers, could leave because their client was going to be detained. They resisted, arguing it was against the Constitution and a breach of fundamental human rights to interrogate their client without his counsel. He said they demanded to know what charges had been preferred against their client, something the BNI officials were not ready to provide. According to him, a scuffle ensued between officials of the BNI and Asabee which led to the shoving of Zuleika Asamoah Boateng, wife of Asabee to the ground. Zuleika had insisted to be locked up together with her husband. The counsel said they will meet to consider the next line of action.

Arguments

One issue which should be discussed or at the very least, be addressed before discussing Asabee's arrest and detention is whether the BNI has been acting appropriately in carrying out its duties. This issue has popped up many times since former members of government begun receiving invitations to the BNI.

The BNI is not the appropriate government agency to deal with Asabee awarding the contract to his sister-in-law

The BNI is the internal intelligence agency of Ghana. Among the duties of the BNI are dealing with organized crime and providing intelligence to counter threats to security. The BNI is legally a creature of The Security and Intelligence Agencies Act (Act 526) 1996. Amongst other security agencies, the Security an Intelligence Agencies Act 1996 also recognized the existence of Ghana's Bureau of National Investigations and the research department (of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs) as 'the Internal and External Intelligence Agencies of the State, referred to in this Act as "the Intelligence Agencies"'. (See Kwame Boafo Arthur, Ghana: one decade of the liberal State, page 193) The wide range of responsibilities assigned to the intelligence agencies under the Act covered the following functions:
1. Collect, analyze, retain and disseminate as appropriate information and intelligence respecting activities that may constitute threats to the security of the State and government of Ghana;
2. Safeguard the economic well-being of the State against threats posed by the acts of omissions of persons or organizations both inside and outside the country;
3. Protect the country against threats of espionage, sabotage, terrorism, hijacking, piracy, drug trafficking and similar offences;
4. Protect the State against activities of persons, both nationals and non-nationals, intended to overthrow the government of Ghana or undermine the constitutional order through illegal political, military, industrial or other means or through any other unconstitutional method; and
5. Perform such other functions as may be directed by the President or the Council. (Republic of Ghana 1996).
The reforms and adoption of a new security structure were seen as a fundamental priority in order to address and ensure the end of military coups. (See Higazi 2004, quoted in Security Sector Reform in Ghana, page 4). The intelligence agencies were intended to be political neutral. In light of the functions of the BNI set out above, I do not believe the BNI is the most appropriate government agency to determine whether Asabee was wrong in awarding the contract to his sister-in-law. The BNI's primary concern should be related and limited to intelligence concerning the national security of Ghana from within and without the Ghana. Awarding a contract to refurbish the Ministry of Information does not fall within this concern and as such the BNI cannot be the most appropriate body to deal with Asabee awarding the contract to refurbish the Ministry of Information to his sister-in-law.
The Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) and the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) constitute the two main anti-corruption bodies actively existing in contemporary Ghana. The CHRAJ has pretty much the same role as all other commissions of inquiry that have existed in the past, its role is to investigate deeply into all types of allegations of corruption and report their findings to the Attorney General who then takes a decision as what procedures should be undertaken under legal requirements. Nevertheless, it has a role that was not given to any other precedent commissions, that is a mission to educate the public on their human rights and freedom. Its jurisdiction is limited because it cannot investigate certain matters which are, overall, to prevent it to 'engage in unnecessary litigation and confrontation with the government of the day.'
The other anti-corruption body that is active in contemporary Ghana is the SFO. The SFO was created by an Act of Parliament, the Serious Fraud Office Act 1993 (Act 466) as part of the Public Services of Ghana. It was established as a specialized agency to monitor, investigate and, on authority of the Attorney-General, prosecute any offence involving serious financial or economic loss to the State. The executive director of the SFO can decide from his own accord, and more importantly without any legal institutional control, to accuse that person of 'serious and complex fraud' and consequently deprive that person of freedom of movement and of access to his or her property.
Thus, these two bodies are appropriately set up to deal with Asabee awarding the contract to his sister-in-law. Given the limited financial autonomy of the CHRAJ and the extensive prosecution powers of the executive director of the SFO, the SFO would have been the most appropriate agency amongst all three agencies to handle Asabee's issue. It has been argued that the discretion the executive of the SFO has creates a presumption of institutional corruption. Nonetheless, the executive director's powers under the Serious Fraud Office Act 1993 (Act 466) would have been legitimately exhausted if the SFO had decided to prosecute Asabee under the Act.
Accordingly, it is my opinion that the BNI were not the most appropriate agency to investigate and/or prosecute any contract award by a former minister particularly in Asabee's case. This is because awarding a contract to his sister-in-law to refurbish the Ministry of Information, assuming the facts were proved against him, may potentially amount to an offence involving serious financial or economic loss to the State and as such the SFO was responsible for investigating and prosecuting Asabee. It must be proved that the financial or economic loss to the State was serious. What amounts to serious will be determined by the courts. However, case law gives a fair idea and in my opinion, it is less likely that awarding a contract to a sister-in-law will amount to serious financial or economic loss to the State.

The arrest and detention of Asabee were a breach of Asabee's fundamental human rights and freedoms under the Constitution

The fundamental human rights and freedoms of the Ghanaian citizen are entrenched in Chapter 5 of the Constitution. Art. 12(1) of the Constitution provides that "The fundamental human rights and freedoms enshrined in this chapter shall be respected and upheld by the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary and all other organs of government and its agencies and, where applicable to them, by all natural and legal persons in Ghana, and shall be enforceable by the Courts as provided for in this Constitution." Every person in Ghana is entitled to fundamental human rights and freedoms in Chapter 5 of the Constitution. (See Art. 12(2)).
According to Art. 14(1)(g), "every person shall be entitled to his personal liberty and no person shall be deprived of his personal liberty except in the following cases and in accordance with procedure permitted by law – upon reasonable suspicion of his having committed or being about to commit a criminal offence under the laws of Ghana." Subject to argument one and assuming the BNI had the authority to investigate and prosecute Asabee, then upon reasonable suspicion that Asabee had committed a criminal offence or about to commit a criminal offence under the laws of Ghana, the BNI could deprive Asabee of his personal liberty in accordance with the procedure permitted by law.
Art. 14(2) further states that "a person who is arrested, restricted or detained shall be informed immediately, in a language that he understands, of the reasons for his arrest, restriction or detention and of his right to a lawyer of his choice." According to the facts as reported by the media (myjoyonline), the BNI failed to provide the reasons for Asabee's arrest, restriction or detention when asked by Peter Okudzeto, Asabee's lawyer. This is a breach of Art. 14(2). The clear and utter disregard for this fundamental human right and freedom – even after protests from Asabee's lawyer – raises serious issues of the rule of law and constitutionality in Ghana's growing democracy.
Under Art. 14(3)(b), "a person who is arrested, restricted or detained upon reasonable suspicion of his having committed or being about to commit a criminal offence under the laws of Ghana, and who is not released, shall be brought before a court within forty-eight hours after the arrest, restriction or detention." Thus, Asabee must be brought before a court within forty-eight hours of his arrest and detention. Forty-eight hours after his arrest and his detention will be Saturday, 15^th August 2009. If Asabee is not brought before the court on Friday, 14^th August 2009, he will have to wait until Monday, 17^th August 2009, to appear before court since the courts are not in session during the weekends.
Alternatively, he should be released without prejudice to any further proceedings that may be brought against him. (See Art. 14(4)). His release should either be unconditionally or upon reasonable conditions, including in particular, conditions reasonably necessary to ensure that he appears at a later date for trial or for proceedings preliminary to trial. (See Art. 14(4)).

Conclusion

The BNI was not the most appropriate body to handle issues concerning contracts being awarded to former minister's sister-in-law by the former minister as the BNI's primary concern should be related and where possible, limited to intelligence concerning national security. I further submit that the SFO is and should be the most appropriate agency to handle Asabee's issue as the issue falls within the SFO's authority and the SFO has extensive powers in dealing with the issue competently. In addition, the BNI breached Asabee's fundamental human rights and freedoms when the BNI failed to inform or provide reasons as to why Asabee had been arrested and detained. I reiterate the fact that this raises serious concerns regarding the turn rule of law and constitutionality is taking or has taken in Ghana. This is definitely not the State cultivating respect for the fundamental human rights and freedoms.
President Mills in his many speeches and interviews has not hesitated to inform Ghanaians and the world of his desire to ensure the rule of law is strongly upheld in Ghana. I suggest he lets his administration's actions do the talking instead of him repeating the theme in the preceding statement in his speeches and interviews.
Also, I should mention that I am not saying Asabee is innocent; nor am I saying he is guilty. Awarding a contract to a sister-in-law raises a conflict of interest issue. Therefore, Asabee was required and should have ensured that the conflict of interest issue did not impair, in anyway, his discretion in awarding the contract to his sister-in-law. Failure to ensure his discretion was not impaired by the conflict of interest issue is a breach of a fiduciary duty given the position he held and if he did cause financial loss to the State he should be rightly held accountable.

Written and Edited by

Kow A. Essuman Esq. LL.M. (Cornell);

Barrister-at-Law of Lincoln's Inn.

All comments, corrections and contributions should be sent to kaessuman@yahoo.com.

This opinion is based on the thoughts and observations of Kow A. Essuman Esq. Any attempt to reproduce all or any part of this article without the express permission of the above named person shall be an infringement of intellectual property laws; following which the author reserves the right to commence an action/suit against any such person (s) or body for breach of copyright and/or any other action/suit the author sees fit.

Tribalism in politics: NPP needs to wipe the slate clean

2009-06-30T04:31:00.001+01:00

Introduction

I would refer to myself as a Ghanaian whenever I am asked what my nationality is; regardless of where in the world I am. It is my national identity. All Ghanaians belong to different tribes and have different cultural values. The only thing that brings all these tribes and cultures together is the national identity as Ghanaians. Since we all identify ourselves as Ghanaians, one will naturally assume that we will relate to each other as Ghanaians and run the affairs of the country as Ghanaians. However, it is sad to observe and say that such is not the case; particularly in the politics of Ghana. I will not attempt to compare political parties in this short opinion except focus on the main differences in the way things are done in the NPP and maybe draw examples from the main political parties.

"National" to "New"

The founders of the New Patriotic Party (as it is called now) had agreed on naming the party National Patriotic Party. However, at a press conference to outdoor the party, the interim chairman, Mr B J da Rocha announced the name of the party as the "New Patriotic Party" and dropped the "National" to the surprise of all of those who were present at the earlier meeting at which "National" was adopted. He later explained that many of the parties that had been formed in Ghana, following the lifting of the ban on party politics had "National" in them and he thought the NPP should sound different. (See http://www.npp-ghana.org/index.php?categoryid=8).
I never thought deeply about the above paragraph until very recently when I read an article about the history of the NPP. Was the reason behind dropping "National" for "New" given in good faith? I would rather have a political party with the word "National" in its name because then I would feel the party serves the interest of everyone who identifies as a Ghanaian national. But then with the word "New" substituting "National", I question whether the NPP has a national interest. The article I read summarized the history of the NPP as follows: tension between two parties – one dominated by Asantes and the other dominated by Akyems – finally led to a united political party. To avoid further tensions, both sides agreed to select a leader not from one of the dominating tribes i.e. Asante or Akyem. Busia, a Bono, was picked and eventually led this newly formed party to victory. Therefore, with the NPP deriving its foundations from the Progress Party and the Danquah/Busia Tradition, it is safe to say that the NPP is a large Asante-Akyem base. (Read the entire article here http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/artikel.php?ID=163697).

Asante – Akyem Rivalry

You may ask why any of this tribal classification is relevant. Fast forward to 1992 when the NPP was formed, the word "National" is substituted for the word "New". I fail to see what is new about the NPP. The NPP is still dominated by Asantes and Akyems, seventeen years since the formation of the NPP. There is nothing new in that is there? Tribalism has never been so palpable in the party until now. Many will disagree with me on the last statement. Nonetheless, those who disagree are only living in denial and it will be in the party's interest to deal with this issue before it escalates. Ultimately, it will be in the interest of Ghana and its young democracy.
The party through its presidential candidate, Mr. J.A. Kufuor (an Asante), won the 2000 elections in a run-off. For a party founded to reflect the strong principles of the Progress Party, one would assume they would have upheld the agreement not to have a leader from either dominating tribes until all tribes within the party were equally represented. There is the argument that, Mr. Kufuor deserved to be the presidential candidate as he was duly qualified. I strongly believed that Nana Addo (an Akyem) also deserved to be the presidential candidate as he was also duly qualified. He played a significant role in the formation of the NPP; contributed to the party financially and intellectual; appeared on television shows such as Talking Point to defend the position of the NPP whilst the NPP was in opposition; and participated in demonstrations such as "Kumi Preko" whilst the NPP was in opposition. I was under the blind impression that he would secure the presidential candidacy of the NPP for the 2008 election without strong opposition.
However, the beauty of the democracy existent within the NPP proved me wrong. Or at least I thought it did. Nana Addo's strongest opponent was Alan Kyerematen (an Asante). Comparing the two men from an objective point of view, taking into account who had made significant contributions to the party since its formation and who will serve as a better leader, I had no doubt in my mind that Nana Addo was the better man. Amongst the contestants for presidential candidacy were other duly qualified members who had contributed significantly to the NPP as Nana Addo had. For instance, Jake Obetsebi Lamptey (a Ga) had contributed significantly to the formation of the party and whilst the party was in opposition. However, he was overlooked when it came to selecting a presidential candidate because he was not Asante or Akyem.
Given the contributions by these men, you would have expected Mr. Kufuor to have rendered his support to either of them or any of the other contestants who had contributed to the party from its formation through the time when the party was in opposition. On the contrary, Mr. Kufuor threw his support behind his fellow Asante man, Alan Kyeremanten. He immediately won the support of the Asante arm of the party resurrecting the supposedly buried tribalism within the party. Nana Addo lost the election in a run-off. Since then, there have been calls for him to remain as the presidential candidate. Others argue that he had his chance and he lost it. The latter comes from the Asante arm of the party. As much as I would like to see Nana Addo run as the presidential candidate in 2012, I am afraid such tribalism in politics is eating up the party.
Many people refer to the NDC as an "Ewe" party primarily because majority of the votes the NDC receives comes from the Volta Region. It is their strongest hold amongst the other regions. However, the composition of the NDC party is very diverse. In fact, almost all tribes are represented within the NDC. In any event, it is arguable that "Fantes" are a majority within the NDC. The NDC can therefore hold itself out as a party with a national interest at heart. Similarly, the CPP has a diverse membership.

"Patriotic" in NPP

The NPP may argue that the word "Patriotic" in the name of its party demonstrates its national interest. A patriot is a proud supporter or defender of his or her own country and its way of life. Is this what the NPP is about? I argue that the NPP is a proud supporter or defender of the Asante and Akyem tribes and its way of life and not Ghana as a nation. The NPP's motto is "Development in Freedom". How is there freedom when members of other tribes are not able to compete fairly for presidential candidacy? Some members argue that the running mate is always from the northern part of Ghana; so given that, the party reflects representation across the entire country. That argument only supports how the NPP takes for granted the other tribes in the country. In order not to appear tribally biased, they select a northerner as a running mate in every election year. Why can't a northerner be a presidential candidate?

Final Thoughts

In fact, if the NPP wants to portray itself as a Ghanaian party or an all inclusive tribe party, then the presidential ticket for the 2012 election should have someone from the northern part of Ghana as a presidential candidate and either someone from the Central Region, Western Region, Brong Ahafo Region or Greater Accra as a running mate. Alternatively, if the NPP wants to play the game of politics, it can concentrate on southern Ghana to win the election. In that case, the presidential ticket should have someone from the Central Region with the running mate from Brong Ahafo Region. This gives the party a fighting chance and at the same time appearing as an all tribes party – a Ghanaian political party and not an Asante-Akyem party. This will limit if not stop members of the NPP joining political parties that appear to be Ghanaian parties.
At the moment, the NPP is neither a national party nor is it a patriotic party and there is nothing new about the party. So as the party takes steps to amend its constitution, it should bear in mind the effect tribalism has in splitting a country and not only a political party. The party seeks to enlarge the Electoral College and limiting the number of contestants for presidential candidacy. Enlarging the Electoral College will not solve the current tribalism problem unless the Electoral College is diverse and fully represents the other tribes in Ghana. Furthermore, putting a cap on the number of contestants for presidential candidacy undermines democracy. Instead, I suggest that the party re-adopt the agreement not to have an Asante-Akyem leader or presidential candidate for some time. This position should be adopted for peace and unity within the party. In the process, it will allow the party to even out and be a more nationally represented party. And hopefully, members of the party will identify themselves as Ghanaians and not by tribes.

Written and Edited by

Kow A. Essuman Esq. LL.M. (Cornell);

Barrister-at-Law of Lincoln's Inn.

All comments, corrections and contributions should be sent to kaessuman@yahoo.com.

Ex-Gratia - Mills’ Suspension of the Package is Ultra Vires and Unconstitutional

2009-03-19T06:45:00.001Z

Introduction

This piece is in fact long overdue. I was asked by many colleagues and friends to provide my opinion on the ex gratia package recommended for the former President, Mr. Kufuor. I failed to do so; given the busy schedule I had to manage at the time the package got into the public domain. Nevertheless, I do recall mentioning to a few colleagues and friends that Mr. Kufuor was entitled to the recommended package. At the time of making those statements, I was unaware of the constitutional provisions making that possible. I relied solely on the authority of Parliament to make laws which become binding once they have received assent. I read numerous articles on the issue as well as comments individuals posted regarding the package. It was unfortunate to see how personal some individuals responded to these articles. Even worse, these individuals referred to Mr. Kufuor as an extortionist who had the sole intention of defrauding the country. I was saddened by such comments for many reasons. But the only reason which pervaded my sadness is as follows.
Mr. Kufuor in his capacity as the President did not reward himself with the ex gratia package. A committee was set up to look at what befitted a former President (including all former Presidents). The recommendations of the committee were then sent to Parliament for approval. Parliament approved the recommendations which then had legal effect. The reason for bringing this up is that, Parliament could have rejected the recommendations of the committee if it thought they were unreasonable. But Parliament did not. Instead, Parliament approved the recommendations of the committee thereby giving it legal effect.
Parliament is representative of the people of Ghana. Members of Parliament are elected through parliamentary elections to represent their constituencies in Parliament. I do not intend to educate anyone on election processes except I am only reminding readers of who sits in Parliament. The electorates send MPs there to represent their interest. Anything done in Parliament by the MPs is done on behalf of the electorate. As a result of that reasoning, the MPs by approving the recommendations were doing so on behalf of the electorate. Hence, the name calling of Mr. Kufuor was unnecessary and in any event, the electorates should have held the MPs they sent to Parliament to represent them accountable for approving the recommendations.
Having explained the reason that pervaded my sadness, I remember making a comment along the lines of the aforementioned that since Parliament had approved the package; Parliament had the exclusive authority to repeal it. I never went into the details of that statement but I hope to do so in this opinion. I also recall some legal practitioners arguing along the same lines but none of them explained the reasons underlying their arguments.
In any event, I have now had the opportunity to assess the legal implications and constitutionality of the actions of the current President, His Excellency Professor John Evans Atta-Mills. One question that I faced was: why hasn't Mr. Kufuor claimed what he is entitled to by virtue of the Chinery Hesse ex gratia package? I could come up with only one answer which makes sense to me. And that is Mr. Kufuor is being the gentleman that he is in giving the new administration time to find their feet before he makes any demands on his entitlements. Mr. Kufuor himself, I recall, referred to the contents of the ex gratia package as unreasonable. Such modesty as it may be viewed is not enough and is irrelevant to the issue that has a risen as a result of the Chinery Hesse Report.
There was a public outcry when the details of the ex gratia package got into the public domain. This in fact caused former and current MPS who contributed to the approval of the recommendation to take a rather adverse stance. Eventually, Prof. Mills suspended all and any payment of gratuity to any beneficiary under the Chinery Hesse Report. It is my understanding, based on reasonable information, that some former MPs withdrew their salaries under the package before Prof. Mills' suspension was announced. Nonetheless, this opinion will focus on the suspension of gratuity payments to Mr. Kufuor.
At this point, I find it necessary to stress that this opinion is entirely legal and is in no way whatsoever influenced by any political ideology or affiliation. It is not politically biased or indeed biased except to the extent of the arguments raised to persuade the reader that the foregoing act of Prof. Mills is ultra vires and unconstitutional. The 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana is the relevant legal framework for the arguments below and all articles mentioned herein are in reference to the 1992 Constitution unless otherwise stated.

Arguments

The Suspension is inconsistent with the 1992 Constitution

At present, it is or should be common knowledge that the President on leaving office receives gratuity payments for his service to the nation. This is enshrined in the Constitution. Unfortunately, when members of the public refer to the Constitution in light of the gratuity package, they mention Article 71 which deals with who determines the salaries and allowances payable, and the facilities and privileges available to the President. This article also deals with salaries and allowances payable and the facilities and privileges available to MPs, Speakers of Parliament, members of the Council of State, Ministers of State and other significant public servants mentioned in that Article.
As mentioned earlier, this opinion intends to focus on the ex gratia package in relation to Mr. Kufuor – the ex President. For that reason, the relevant part of the Constitution is Article 71(2) which states that "The salaries and allowances payable, and the facilities available, to the President, the Vice-President, the chairman and the other members of the Council of State; Ministers of State and Deputy Ministers, being expenditure charged on the Consolidated Fund, shall be determined by Parliament on the recommendations of the committee referred to in clause (1) of this article." For the purposes of Article 71, and except as otherwise provided in the Constitution, "salaries" includes allowances, facilities and privileges and retiring benefits or awards – See Art. 71(3).
Interpreting Clause 2 in light of Clause 1, Parliament is the only body charged to determine salaries and allowances payable, and the facilities available to Mr. Kufuor on the recommendations of the committee. Prof. Mills can only determine the salaries and allowances payable, and the facilities and privileges available to MPs, Speakers of Parliament and the public servants mentioned in Clause 1. The context of this power is different from the power that Parliament has in Clause 2. Also, it should be distinguished from Prof. Mills' power to appoint the five person committee in accordance with the advice of the Council of State. Prof. Mills does not have the constitutional power to determine "salaries and allowances payable, and the facilities available" to Mr. Kufuor.
Instead, the only role the President has in the determination of the "salaries and allowances payable, and the facilities available" to the President is selecting the five person committee which makes recommendations to Parliament. I believe the rationale behind this is to prevent the President from awarding himself exorbitant salaries and allowances and making available to himself, luxurious facilities. In this case, the Chinery Hesse Committee was set up to recommend gratuity payments befitting a former President. The Committee then made recommendations to Parliament in the Chinery Hesse Report which was subsequently approved by Parliament in accordance with the Article 71(2).
So far, all that has been discussed is relevant to the "salaries and allowances payable, and the facilities available" to the President. Mr. Kufuor is no longer the President so how does this apply to him? With regards to Mr. Kufuor, the pertinent constitutional provision is Article 68; which I urge anyone reading this opinion to take a look at thoroughly. Article 68(3) reiterates the above analysis of Parliament's power to determine "salaries and allowances payable, and the facilities available" to the President.
According to Article 68(4), on leaving office, the President shall receive a gratuity in addition to pension, equivalent to his salary and other allowances and facilities prescribed by Parliament in accordance with clause (3) of this article. Thus, Mr. Kufuor is entitled to the contents of the ex gratia package under this article. It is my opinion that this Article gives Mr. Kufuor a constitutional ground for instituting legal proceedings against the current administration for not honouring the contents of the Chinery Hesse Report thus far.
There is an argument that the use of the words "payable" and "available" in Article 71(2) imply that the ex President has no right to the salaries, allowances and the facilities until the present administration decides to take steps with the view of honouring the contents of the ex gratia package. There is also the argument that Parliament has to determine when the ex gratia package will be available to the President. Both arguments, in my opinion are flawed and unconstitutional.
The wording of Article 68(4) begins with "on leaving office" which simply refers to the day the incumbent President ceases to be the President. In this case, the Seventh day of January 2009 was the day Mr. Kufuor ceased to be President; as Prof. Mills was sworn in as the third President of the fourth Republic of Ghana that day. Mr. Kufuor has been entitled to the contents of the Chinery Hesse Report since then. I am unaware of any implementation date set by Parliament as to when the Chinery Hesse Report is to have legal effect. Nevertheless, if there was or is such a date, it will be inconsistent with Article 68(4) which entitles Mr. Kufuor to the contents of the Chinery Hesse Report "on leaving office".
Article 68(8) states that "the salary, allowances, facilities and privileges of the President shall not be varied to his disadvantage while he holds office." Therefore, as Mr. Kufuor is no longer in office, the "salaries and allowances payable, facilities and privileges" can be varied to his disadvantage. However, Article 68(9) stipulates that "the pension payable to the President and the facilities available to him shall not be varied to his disadvantage during his lifetime." Thus, the contents of the Chinery Hesse Report can be varied; save for any pension payable to Mr. Kufuor and the facilities available to him cannot be varied to his disadvantage during his lifetime. Any attempt to do that will be inconsistent with the Constitution.
In the process of writing this opinion, the Council of State was sworn in; and Prof. Mills immediately directed them to review and work on the Chinery Hesse report. The Council of State's role in the ex gratia package is to advise the President in appointing the five person committee which recommends the package to Parliament (See Art. 71(1)). Therefore, the Council of State does not have a constitutional basis to review or work on the Chinery Hesse report. Any such review or work is unconstitutional and ultra vires. Thus in my opinion, the direction is inconsistent with the 1992 Constitution.
There is the argument that under Article 90(1), a bill which has been published in the Gazette or passed by Parliament shall be considered by the Council of State if the President so requests. In so far as this appears to be similar to Prof. Mills' direction above, it is not. Firstly, this provision does not relate to gratuity payments where the President and the Council of State are constitutionally barred from direct involvement in the determination of gratuity payments to the President. Secondly, once a bill receives assent, it becomes an Act and is subject to review by the Judiciary only (this is thoroughly elucidated hereinafter). In view of the foregoing, Article 90(1) does not validate Prof. Mills' direction.

The Suspension is inconsistent with the Concept of Separation of Powers

A model well known and popular discussed in Constitutional Law is the concept of Separation of Powers. This model is often traced to Baron de Montesquieu, a French enlightened political philosopher. It simply requires powers of a State to be vested in three separate branches: the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. The framers of the 1992 Constitution adopted this concept and entrenched it accordingly in Chapters 8, 10 and 11 of the 1992 Constitution. By so doing, each branch of the State acts as a check on the others; thus fulfilling the simultaneous concept of Checks and Balances. The legislature is responsible for enacting the laws of the State. The executive implements the laws passed by the legislature and the judiciary adjudicates by interpreting the enactment and implementation of the law.
There are some situations where the responsibilities of the three branches overlap. The executive may legislate by enacting regulations or rules but can only do so if the legislature has permitted it to do by enacting an enabling or parent Act. The executive may also adjudicate when it sets up a board or commission to deal with the complaints of aggrieved persons. The judiciary legislates through case law and some members of the legislature are usually in the executive especially in the case of Ghana. I just needed to point that out before getting into the substance of the argument.
Prof. Mills as the president is a member of the executive branch of the State. Thus his responsibilities are to govern Ghana by implementing the laws passed by parliament through his administration. He does not have the right to interpret the Constitution per se nor to legislate or pass laws. In responding to the public outcry, Prof. Mills suspended all and any payment of the ex gratia package to Mr. Kufuor. It may sound like the politically correct thing to do but my question is and has been throughout this opinion is whether it was legally correct for him to do that. In addition to suspending the payments, Mr. Mills announced that he will review the package. It can therefore be implied that this review will result in amendments to the package in order to appease the public who were appalled by the contents of the ex gratia package.
Prof. Mills as the executive had no role in suspending a report approved by Parliament as by so doing, he was adjudicating by interpreting the law passed by the legislature. This is clearly inconsistent with the concept outlined above. What the new administration should have done and perhaps, should do is petition the Supreme Court to declare Parliament's approval of the package null and void. In my opinion, it would be difficult to prove that Parliament's approval was inconsistent with the constitution. As per arguments mentioned above, it is Parliament's constitutional role to approve recommendations by a committee set up to determine the President's salary.
Also, he had no role in legislating which will be exactly what he will be doing if he attempts to amend the ex gratia package recommended by Parliament. It is probable that he will set up a committee to carry out this review and possible amendment. The position does not change if such is the case as the executive will still be legislating through the amendment. Alternatively, it can be argued that the amendments can be introduced in Parliament on behalf of the executive and this is constitutionally permitted (See Art. 108). However, this does not take care of the fact that suspending the package in the first place was inconsistent with the concept.
Furthermore, Parliament is the only body that can change or repeal prior laws. It usually does this by passing new laws to expressly repeal the old one or expressly changing the old laws. Parliament must also legislate as permitted by the Constitution. Thus, Parliament cannot pass any law which is inconsistent with any Constitutional provisions. If Parliament passes a law that is inconsistent with the Constitution, the Supreme Court has the authority under the Constitution to declare such legislation unconstitutional and invalid. Accordingly, Parliament is the only body that can amend or repeal the ex gratia package in addition to being the only body under the 1992 Constitution that can determine the "salaries and allowances payable, and the facilities available" to the President (See Art. 71(2)).
Another key issue worth noting is that once a Bill of Parliament goes through all stages and subsequently receives Assent, questions as to the process of its passage are irrelevant. In other words, where a Bill of Parliament becomes an Act of Parliament, questions such as how it was introduced in Parliament, the debates that took place or how it was analysed by a committee is irrelevant to the validity of that piece of legislation as an Act of Parliament. It can only be challenged as being inconsistent with the Constitution.
It has been argued by some members of the public that because the recommendations were introduced rather late and received approval on 6^th January 2009, it is invalid. It is also argued that the package cannot be held to be binding because MPs did not properly debate the contents of the recommendations. Taking into account the issue I have just explained, these arguments are irrelevant. As long as the recommendations were approved by a properly constituted Parliament which seemed to be the case here, questions to the validity of the package, in my opinion, are irrelevant.

Conclusion

In my humble opinion, Prof. Mills acted ultra vires when he suspended all and any payment of gratuity to Mr. Kufuor. He had no constitutional basis for instituting such an action hence the suspension was and is unconstitutional. Prof. Mills exceeded his powers thereby subjecting the suspension to review by the Courts. As mentioned above, I wonder why Mr. Kufuor has not commenced legal proceedings to challenge the acts of Prof. Mills. As modest as he may be in thinking the package was and is unreasonable, there is a serious constitutional question that needs to be addressed.
The President and for that matter the executive should know what it can and cannot do. They should not be allowed to take actions which are inconsistent with the constitution and beyond their powers. The citizens of Ghana were quick to cry foul when details of the ex gratia package were made public. Yet, they have ignored and failed to question the unconstitutional way Prof. Mills has handled the situation in relation to Mr. Kufuor's gratuity. The average Ghanaian could have challenged and can still challenge Prof. Mills' suspension of the ex gratia package in relation to Mr. Kufuor.
All that needs to be done is for a citizen of Ghana to file a motion at the Supreme Court to challenge Prof. Mills' action on the grounds that his actions are ultra vires and unconstitutional. The Supreme Court shall have jurisdiction to hear the case because it involves the President of Ghana as a party in relation to issues of constitutionality (See Art. 130 (1) of the 1992 Constitution). Secondly, the average Ghanaian will have standing to file the motion by reason of being a citizen of Ghana. Thus, I hope the arguments I raised in this opinion will persuade any one of its readers to institute legal proceedings on the grounds echoed throughout this opinion.

Written and Edited by Kow A. Essuman Esq. LL.B. Hons, Barrister. All comments, corrections and contributions should be sent to kaessuman@yahoo.com.

This opinion is based on the thoughts and observations of Kow A. Essuman Esq. LL.B. Hons, Barrister. Any attempt to reproduce all or any part of this article without the express permission of the above named person shall be an infringement of intellectual property laws; following which the author reserves the right to commence an action/suit against any such person (s) or body for breach of copyright and/or any other action/suit the author sees fit.

Parents Play a Role in Youth Crime in an Area

2009-03-06T23:15:00.001Z

Most sociologists would agree that criminal and deviant behaviour can be linked to life at home. There are enough factors about life at home that can be linked to criminal and deviant behaviour; such as child abuse, alcohol/drug abuse by parents or guardians, domestic violence etc. Also, a child can be led into criminal behaviour by the norms and values that it is taught. For example, if a child is exposed to violence as a way of resolving issues, and then it is more likely than not that the child will engage in violence as a way of resolving issues.

Neglect is another important thing that most people experience at childhood which goes a long way to affecting them later on in life. Children require their parents' attention. However, that is hardly the case these days. Especially children from a broken home or where one parent is absent lack the necessary attention children need. The single parent is left with the double burden of looking after the children as well as managing a job to make ends meet. They are usually forced to put work first in order to earn enough money to look after the kids. Consequently, their children result to hanging out in the streets to get the attention they are lacking at home. Hanging out in the streets eventually leads to those children joining a local gang that engages in criminal or deviant behaviour.

Some parents refuse to or don't have as much control over their children as they should; or some parents just don't care because they can't handle the responsibilities of parenting. If parents were to reinforce rules and boundaries in the household by making it known to the children the consequences of deviant behaviour i.e. teaching them wrong from right at a reasonably young age, then the children will be more aware of that difference when they are growing up in society. They would appreciate from a very young age that bad behaviour results in adverse consequences. Teach a child the way to go so that when he grows, he will not depart from it. I am not sure that is exactly how the proverb goes but it is paraphrased from a verse in the Holy Book. Another one is: spare the rod, spoil the child.

I agree with both sayings and I am sure many people born and raised in Ghana or Ghanaian homes; or religious homes will readily agree with me. I remember my father giving me a strong whipping when I was young because I told a lie which embarrassed him. Till this day, I find it difficult to tell a lie. Thus it is evident that such training will be with children through their lives, making it less likely that they will end up in a life of crime and/or deviance.

Some people argue that putting fear in the children is another way to control them; because the children have the mentality that if they do "x" it will result in their parents doing "y". They will fear the penalty they will receive from their parents. Others argue that this form of control rather drives children away from the home because they would rather want to run away from trouble at home than come home to trouble at home. But then again, if they know they don't want to return home to trouble, they should know not to act in a deviant manner.

There are other explanations that sociologists would agree with on what else might affect the level of crime in an area such as peer groups and subcultures. A person could be pressured by peers into being involved in deviant behaviour in order to fit in with their friends. There are also factors like lack of opportunity which prevents "reformed criminals" from having a decent lifestyle. Elements of a decent lifestyle will include things like well paid job and a decent house. This may lead to "status frustration" which is when an individual gets so frustrated at their financial and social status. They also get frustrated about things that others have that they don't have. This is called Relative Deprivation – being aware that others are doing better than you.

Or you could say the nature of society is to blame for crime; which is what the Marxists came up with. Marxism draw up the idea of Consumerism – buying is good. People must have the latest clothes, cars, toys, technology and etc. This can create competition between social classes because people will strive to be better than others.

In summary, society as a whole supports crime because it makes us want things that we don't have.

Credit: Akua Afriyie – To what extent would sociologists agree that the level of youth crime in an area depends on how well parents control their children?

Ghana at 52

2009-03-06T08:54:00.001Z

52 Years ago, Osagyefuo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah stood amongst other learned Ghanaians and declared Gold Coast independent of British rule. In his exact words:

"...My Fellow Ghanaians, at Long last the battle has ended. Ghana, our beloved country is free forever...the independence of Ghana is meaningless unless it is linked with the total liberation of Africa..."

I remember that statement from Social Studies in JSS. He wept as he made that statement; with his white handkerchief in his hand drying the tears off his face. There are rumors about that handkerchief but that is an issue for another day. Were Dr. Nkrumah's tears: tears of joy or he was weeping because of the task ahead? I guess we'll never know but it is a fair inference that it was a mixture of both. The statement mentioned above is as relevant today as it was some 52 years back.

After 52 years of independence, are we enjoying the freedom and justice that Dr. Nkrumah and his comrades fought for? I believe we are and I will like to include peace. After an election which can be described as the most tense, dramatic and democratic in the history of Ghana and African politics, we have a stable government in Ghana. The budget of this government read in Parliament yesterday has the theme "Investing in a Better Ghana".

The significance of this day is not realized amongst the Ghanaian youth today. To the ordinary Ghanaian youth especially those living abroad, it's a day to rave. I am not saying it is bad to rave and I entirely support the idea of celebrating independence through partying.

All I ask is for you to reflect over the peace enjoyed in Ghana; those who sacrificed their lives and property over the 52 years; those who took decisions and positions to establish the freedoms we enjoy now; the former presidents and leaders of the country as well as those who were and are in opposition; and finally if you have no idea how Ghana came this far, please 'google' and learn something about the struggle for independence.

So my fellow Ghanaians, I boldly say after 52 years of independence, in the fourth republic, freedom and justice truly exists in Ghana – an example being the recent electoral process including all the legal drama involved. And as far as I know, Ghana is the most peaceful nation on earth and the best place to be. I am proud to be Ghanaian. Happy Independence!!!

Alan Will Be a Wrong Choice for the 2012 Election

2009-01-25T15:07:00.001Z

Oh if Alan Cash is nominated which will never be the case, I will gladly watch Mills win for the second time. And this time the difference will be embarrassing. No one (and I mean delegate) has endorsed anyone for presidential candidacy yet. There are only calls. And these calls are coming from people. Nana being the politician that he is has held thanksgiving rallies all over the country. And it is through these rallies that you realize his support for presidential candidacy for the 2012 election. These calls only go to prove the point I echoed in my article (Why We Lost the Election) about how the party was not united behind Nana. I attribute the cause to the Alan Camp. The election just ended some 28 days ago; and all I hear is calls for Alan to be the party's presidential candidate in 2012. That is wrong.

One thing I noticed about Alan is that he incites confusion in the party. Members of the NPP are not stupid. Ok maybe the members are but the delegates who are loyal to the party are not stupid. Alan comes from nowhere and joins the 18 aspirants, throws cash around and contests for their mandate for the presidential candidacy. When he loses or rather concedes, he threatens to resign from the party. He was advised otherwise by his primary supporter, Kufuor. And also certain promises were made to him. Where is the loyalty? This shows that all he cares about is being president at the expense of the party. How can such a man lead the party let alone the whole country?

Another thing we need to realize is the Ashantis don't rule the country or even the Akan kingdom. With the tribal effect still in play in Ghanaian politics, it is less likely an Ashanti will become president in the near future. Should Alan stand, he will definitely lose the Akyem votes and the Eastern Region will not be as strong a hold as it was in the 2008 election. Once again visit my blog page to understand why I say that. Politics is a funny game. You play with it as it comes hence Obama's success. All factors were in his favor at the time.

Finally, Alan may be a very good person with loads of experience as a lawyer and economist or whatever he does. He was tipped some years back by Time magazine as one of the global leaders of the future. All these are good attributes but the man lacks political experience. He is not a politician. This is a person who thinks winning an election is about distributing money. As to where the money came from is still questionable. Back to my political experience argument, he has not been in a position of responsibility. He hasn't been in position where he would be accountable to the electorate who gave him their mandate. He should run for MP or Council of State. If he wins and runs his constituency or region well, then I will have some faith in him as a politician. I encourage you to take a look at this link (Alan Kyerematen's Successful Palace Coup).

An alternative to Nana Addo will be Dan Botwe. He just got elected to parliament. I have been impressed by his political achievements so far. He has done a lot for the party. He is loyal and clever. Understands politics and he's not even a lawyer. He will be a better candidate than Alan considering his background and experience. He will be my choice after Nana Addo.

Written and Edited by Kow A. Essuman Esq. LL.B. Hons, Barrister. All comments, corrections and contributions should be sent to kaessuman@yahoo.com.

These are the thoughts and observations of Kow A. Essuman Esq. LL.B. Hons, Barrister. Any attempt to reproduce all or any part of this article without the express permission of the above named person shall be an infringement of intellectual property laws; following which the author reserves the right to commence an action/suit against any such person (s) or body for breach of copyright and/or any other action/suit the author sees fit.

Why We Lost the 2008 Elections

2009-01-22T01:46:00.001Z

Maybe it is too late to point fingers, pin blames or even say 'I told you so'. So do we leave it as it is? I think not. People need to realize that for the party to move forward as we said in our campaign; a number of issues need to be addressed. This short article is meant to highlight the reasons why the NPP lost the 2008 election. It is worth noting that the reasons are not limited to the ones mentioned. Thus, I welcome any other reasons. The supporters in Kumasi have made it clear that Nana Addo should be the presidential candidate representing the NPP in the 2012 election. I agree with them and I am sure supporters around the country feel the same about Nana Addo. [This has since been confirmed all over the country where ever Nana Addo holds a thanksgiving rally]. The supporters in Kumasi say that because presidential candidates are known to run twice. And presidents tend to enjoy two terms. So will Atta Mills and the NDC remain in power till 2016? Possibly. Hence we need to address the issues underlying our defeat in the 2008 election. So then was the loss an internal loss or an external loss? I think it was a mixture of both; with the internal factor dominating. There are different ways of telling the story but I think a chronological outline will be the best. So enjoy and remember to drop your two cents.

Nominating the presidential candidate

You may wonder why I have taken it that far back. I think that's when we started losing the election. In selecting our presidential candidate, there were eighteen (18) presidential aspirants. All presidential aspirants were equally eligible to lead the party. Or were they? Was it a mockery of politics or a mockery of the party itself? Eighteen aspirants meant the party was divided into eighteen unequal sections. This could have been avoided. There were many unfamiliar names. Unfamiliar here means the names were not names one would have expected to see as a presidential aspirant. Eighteen presidential aspirants? This was a joke. That's what it was. The only people duly fit to be presidential aspirants were Nana Addo (of course), Dr. Apraku, Aliu Mahama and Osafo-Maafo. These are the familiar names in the party. The other contestants had no place putting their names forward as presidential aspirants. You may think I am being biased in thinking Nana Addo was the best person to lead the party. I have my reasons. Certain people have served the party since its inception. Nana Addo is one of them. But to be fair a few new names could have been added to the names mentioned. I am just saying eighteen is a large number for a contest.

So how did this affect the party in the 2008 elections? Well, the numerous aspirants had followers. I single out Alan Kyeremanten. There was a breakaway from the NPP by Kwabena Adjei to form his own political party (Reformed Patriotic Democrats - RPD) which contested in the 2008 elections. About 90% of RPD's supporters were from the NPP. It was rumored at the time that the RPD sought to have Alan Kyeremanten as their presidential candidate for the 2008 election. The RPD obtained 0.7% of the votes cast in the December 7 election. On Alan Kyeremanten, he was the first runner up in the nomination for presidential candidates. In other words, he did way better than the names I mentioned in the previous paragraph. Why did he do so well? Remember the name: 'Alan Cash'. His campaign for presidential candidate was all about money. And you know how Ghanaians 'love' the word money. In fact everyone loves money. Besides he had the backing of the ex president Kufuor. Was Kufuor's support for Alan Cash warranted? Many top or old members of the NPP thought and still think otherwise. Firstly, Kufuor was aware of the significant contribution that Nana Addo and the other names mentioned in the previous paragraph had made to the party. Even at times when it was dangerous (personally, politically and asset wise) to have political affiliations other than with the NDC. Secondly, Kufuor's campaign for presidency in 1996 and 2000 was not a money based campaign. He had financial support from all arms of the party. People made personal and financial sacrifices because it was not about money. So then why was Kufuor supporting Alan Cash? I guess that question will never be answered. But in my opinion, the party's division started from then.

Two camps emerged from that convention. The Nana Addo camp and the Alan Cash camp. Nana Addo failed to attain the required votes to lead the party in the 2008 elections under the NPP's constitution. If my memory serves me right, I think Justice Kpegah took issue with this after the 2008 election run-off. Well, there was meant to be a run-off between Nana Addo and Alan Cash. However, Alan Cash conceded and Nana Addo was nominated to lead the party in the 2008 presidential election. It was an honorable thing Alan Cash did. However, did that affect the party? Should there have been a run-off? I personally think a run-off was unnecessary but I am sure members in the Alan Cash camp had a different view. I will explore how the view manifested later on. This was just the beginning of the loss in the 2008 election.

The running mate/vice president selection

Dr. Mahamadu Bawumia? Who is he? I am sure many people can read out his curriculum vitae and tell me who he is at the moment. I challenge those who can that as at August 2008 they had no idea who Bawumia was. This is when I can confidently say I told you so. If anyone remembers my facebook status after Bawumia was picked then you would know what I am talking about. Nana Addo received many recommendations for vice president. Some party leaders think his selection of Bawumia demonstrated his lack of leadership skills. Others like Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey defended Nana Addo's pick. Other members of the party who supported Nana Addo's pick argued that it was a good pick because Bawumia was not your ordinary politician. In fact he was not a politician at all. Does any remember when he was introduced at the Takoradi rally? All I said was a lot of work needs to be done. Look at Mills' pick for running mate; John Mahama. He was actually picked before Bawumia was picked. The point I am making here is that technocrats like Bawumia are not used to win an election. Bawumia's pick was an entirely wrong decision in my opinion. The party lost in Bawumia's hometown. I can only draw one conclusion from this: his own people didn't want him to be vice president. Now his participation in the election has cost him his job as deputy governor of the Bank of Ghana.

Now let us take a look at the recommendations Nana Addo had for running mate. As early as April, chiefs in the central region and other prominent members of society advised Nana Addo to pick a running mate from the central region. Many people argued that chiefs should not involve themselves in politics. Why not? Are they not citizens of the country? In any event, the chiefs or togbui as they are referred to in the Volta Region contributed to the success of the NDC in that region. Besides, the chiefs in the central region were politically right for making such suggestions. Nana Addo was in a presidential election contest with his two main opponents being citizens of the Central Region. For those who advocate that tribalism has no room in politics. I beg you to wake up and smell reality. The 2008 presidential election has confirmed the already existing principle that tribalism is essential in Ghanaian politics. The fantes have been left out of Ghanaian politics for far too long. They have been taken for granted by politicians who have forgotten that the fight for Ghana's independence and politics started with the Fante Confederation in 1868.

The NDC were wise and played on this. Mills, a citizen of the central region from Komenda, was their presidential candidate. To be fair, his hopes for presidency commenced in 2000 where he lost to Kufuor. Yet, he never changed his slogan: 'adze wo fie a oye' (it's good to have something at home). He capitalized on this phrase and of course he received support from his people who without a doubt agreed with him. Nana Addo may have his reasons for not selecting a running mate from the central region or even the western region. The fantes may have voted massively for the NPP even though they would be second in command. At least they would appreciate the fact that the NPP considered the fantes in their administration. So politically, Nana Addo's pick for running mate was wrong.

Some party members argue that Nana Addo had to pick a Muslim from the North because he, Nana Addo, was a Christian from the south. Besides, it was the party's tradition that the running mate be from the Northern part of the country. When did party traditions and customs dominate the essence of winning an election? Anyway, there were other Muslims from the North who were capable of being Nana Addo's running mate. There were three people who had been tipped to be potential running mates of Nana Addo. They were Hajia Alima Mahama, Alhaji Abubakar Saddique Boniface and Lepowura Alhaji Mohammed Nuru Deen Jawula. These were people who were well known on the political scene in Ghana. Alima was actually tipped to be selected as running mate. It would have been a historical appointment as it would have been the first time a woman was on a presidential ticket in Ghanaian politics. Nana Addo actually said he didn't mind having Alima. So why didn't he pick her? Maybe he made the right decision because both Boniface and Alima lost their seats in parliament. With all the support from Tescon, Boniface still lost his seat; one of the casualties in the 2008 elections.

Remember the Alan Cash camp? Well, they believed that Nana Addo will return the honorable act by Alan Cash and select Alan Cash as his running mate. Was this wishful thinking; maybe. But they had a right to think along those lines. The party was split in two camps. What better way to unite the party than to reach out to the leader of the other camp? Maybe Nana Addo had justifications for not selecting Alan Cash. They could include Alan Cash's political views or many other personal reasons. Nana Addo took a page out of Obama's book and decided not to select Alan Cash as his running mate just as Obama refused to select Hillary as his running mate. But then Obama ended up selecting an eminent politician as a running mate and not an unknown technocrat. Bottom-line, Nana Addo's failure to select Alan Cash as his running mate ticked off some loyal supporters of the party who had second thoughts regarding his leadership abilities.

The campaign

We run campaigns in elections in order to win the elections right? In order to win an election, one needs to run a very effective campaign. An effective campaign is effective as long as it stays within the confines of the law. So what was Nana Addo's campaign all about? The members of his campaign team ran a terrible campaign. Oh yes! Jake and Apraku did a terrible job in running Nana Addo's campaign. But they were not the only ones. I will highlight a few scenarios and examples.

In running a campaign against the NDC, one thing should be the core of the campaign: remind Ghanaians of who the NDC are. Ghanaians needed to be reminded of how corrupt the NDC party was; their disregard for the rule of law and civil liberties. That is what Nana Addo's campaign should have focused on alongside the usual development messages and manifesto content. So why didn't they do the things I have suggested? Answer is their respect for politics and the need to have a clean campaign. When did these become relevant in Ghanaian politics? Members of the NPP are known to be elitist and legally educated in one way or the other. For the reason that members of the party have extensive legal knowledge, it is difficult to run such campaigns. There is a term used to refer to such people in Ghana; 'book-long'.

NPP prefer to do everything according to the book. This doesn't work all the time. Besides, I don't see what is wrong with 'negative campaigning'. Apparently, they attempted to campaign along those lines but were asked to desist from such forms of campaign as they were unhealthy. Meanwhile the NDC were running such campaigns. Campaigns full of insults and mockery of the NPP. They stood on the platform at their rallies insulting members of the NPP directly and persuading their ignorant followers with nothing but false statements. Still the NPP refused to run such campaigns. Well until the last minute when the damage had already been done.

'We are moving forward'. This was a very catchy phrase which is still used to this day in churches and many other functions. The renowned musician in Ghana, Daddy Lumba, sung a song using that phrase. And that song still gets airplay even today. With a number of Ghanaian music artists like Kwabena Kwabena backing Nana Addo, the campaign was unsuccessful. The truth is Mills' effort in his campaign exceeded the effort Nana Addo put in his campaign. Mills started the door to door campaign with his message 'I care for you'. The NPP campaign team and others mocked him. Well who is laughing now? The people believed they could relate better to Mills. They felt confident around Mills. They saw Mills as a president who will be able to address their needs should they call upon him.

Nana Addo on the other hand has always been perceived as an arrogant person. Frankly speaking, I thought so too. From the days of 'Talking Point' and the NDC era, anytime he appeared on the television screen, he came across as arrogant. Ghanaians never forget things like that. I personally think Nana Addo did a very good job in getting rid of that arrogance for the sake of the 2008 elections. But like I said, Ghanaians don't forget the initial perception of a person. Ghanaians still viewed Nana Addo as arrogant. Well only 50.23% of Ghanaians viewed him as such.

Even the campaign advertisements were not as effective. The NPP only got serious on the night of 26^th December 2008. By which time it was too late. I wondered why they were airing such effective advertisements at such a time. But I was reminded that it was because members of the party preferred to do things according to book.

Nana Addo should not be the only one held responsible for the party's loss in the 2008 elections. There were many others who had a hand in the party's loss namely the members of parliament for the constituencies where the NPP lost. Members of parliament are given funds to campaign on behalf of the party in their constituencies. MPs pocketed the funds they were given and campaigned a little or not at all. Some MPs went to the extent of disregarding their constituencies all together. A typical example being Asamoah Boateng; the Minister for Information and MP for Mfantseman West. Though his arrogance played a key part in his loss, he disregarded his people and took them for granted. This led to the NPP losing a significant amount of seats in parliament and NDC gaining those seats. How did this affect the NPP's chances? Well with a majority in parliament, it was less difficult for the NDC to convince the undecided voters to vote the incumbent government out.

The presidential factor

I chose this title to compare both ex presidents of the fourth republic and then assess the influence either or both of them had on their party's campaigns. As I have mentioned already, Kufuor was part of the Alan Cash camp during the primaries and the convention. Ordinarily, people would have thought that being the president of the incumbent government; he will use his influence and support whoever was picked as the presidential candidate for the NPP. That should have been the case even though he was in a different camp at the time of nominating the presidential candidate.

Unfortunately for Nana Addo and the NPP, that was not the case. Kufuor did not participate in Nana Addo's campaign. At times I wondered if Kufuor was a member of the NPP party at all. I remember how people campaigned on behalf of Kufuor during the 2000 election and even more during the run-off. People argued that as Kufuor was the president at the time of the election, it was best to separate himself from Nana Addo if he wanted Nana Addo to win. I don't agree with that argument. Considering the favor Kufuor had with the people, especially the fantes, he campaigning on behalf of Nana Addo in the Central Region may have overturned the loss.

I draw your attention to Rawlings. He was all over the place campaigning for Atta Mills. All the NPP could make of this was that Rawlings is controlling Atta Mills. This was far from the truth. Rawlings was only securing his party's success in the election. One thing I noticed about Rawlings during the election period was that from the time when the votes were being counted to the time when the winner was declared and even after, he disappeared from the scene. This is not an article directed at praising or criticizing Rawlings. Save for acknowledging the impact he and his personality had on the Atta Mills' campaign and success during the 2008 election. An essential characteristic of Rawlings is his charisma. Where ever Rawlings went, people came in their numbers just to see him. Rawlings knew this and so did the Mills' campaign team. Hence they capitalized on Rawlings' charisma. Ashanti Region is the stronghold of the NPP. With this in mind, Rawlings spent most of his time campaigning for Atta Mills in the Ashanti Region. Even though it didn't change the existing fact that Ashanti Region is the stronghold of the NPP, it reduced the NPP's votes. Even in the second round.

I don't know the truth in this rumor and I welcome any correction. The rumor being that Dr. Apraku and other prominent members of the NPP including Nana Addo himself asked Kufuor to stay away from the Nana Addo campaign. The reason for this was that Kufuor would have 'overshadowed' Nana Addo in his own campaign. I found this reason to be ridiculous because Kufuor was leaving office. The only thing he could have done to Nana Addo's campaign would have been to help it and not destroy it. Other arguments I have heard about Kufuor's failure to support Nana Addo include Kufuor's intention to sabotage Nana Addo's chances of becoming president. That sounds so absurd right. That's what I thought when I initially heard it. But I cooked up a theory based on some facts which appear to support the fact that Kufuor had the intention of sabotaging Nana Addo's chances of becoming president. Have you wondered why Kufuor decided to release all the NDC members he was keen on imprisoning when he first came to power? Why did he decide to drop all cases against Nana Konadu and the other NDC members?

Rumor is Kufuor was quick to advise Nana Addo to concede. Why would you want to do that to your potential successor who happens to be from your own political party? In the last two years of his administration, Kufuor lost the support of his party members and worsened it by supporting Alan Cash for presidential candidate. Kufuor therefore had to plan for his personal future. So what does he do? He reaches out to the other side and makes a deal with the other side. You may think this assertion is farfetched. I urge you to take a look at the circumstances surrounding Kufuor's exit. He pardons members of the other party he was keen to put behind bars; he drops cases against these same party members. All this a day before he leaves office? I wonder why. Don't you? And more recently, the news coming out of Ghana was the approval of the kinds of benefit the ex-president receives on leaving office. Many people wonder why and call Kufuor greedy for that. All I said was that it is for the NDC to implement this. With that in mind, I was expecting the NDC to publicly declare a negative intention towards this ex gratia policy. I wasn't the only person surprised to hear that the NDC were in fact for the policy. [The NDC's position has since changed. So have many other MPs.] Maybe that was the cost of Nana Addo losing the election. That's just my personal assessment of the rumor that Kufuor indeed had the intention of sabotaging Nana Addo's campaign. However, I don't think Kufuor will actually sabotage the party which sent him to the castle.

Nevertheless, I argue that Kufuor did not do much for the party as was expected of him being the incumbent president. We all realized how the oil prices rose steadily in 2008. But then it dropped and the Kufuor administration never reduced petroleum prices. After the party's inability to obtain the constitutionally required majority to clinch the presidency, Kufuor's administration reduced petroleum prices. How insulting could that be to the citizens of Ghana? They felt they were being patronized by the NPP. And even worse, the NDC capitalized on this and made sure the Ghanaian people were aware of how much the NPP wanted to win the 2008 election by hook or crook. In my opinion, that decision to reduce the petroleum prices after the first round cost Nana Addo in the run-off.

The last straw demonstrating how Kufuor failed to assist the Nana Addo was when he turned around on his way to Tain to ask the citizens of Tain to vote for Nana Addo. No matter the view anyone holds, Tain was decisive in the 2008 election and if the NPP have obtained over 23,000 Nana Addo would have been president of Ghana. This means campaigning in Tain was as important as campaign for the election in general. Immediately it was announced that Tain will be the deciding constituency, prominent and influential members of the NDC headed that way. They campaigned vigorously for Atta Mills. Kufuor was on his way to Tain but then turned around because of security reasons. I couldn't believe my ears when I heard that. And he was only a few miles away from Tain. Were his security personnel and he not aware of the risk before heading off to Tain? Did they have to get that far before realizing that there was threat to the president in Tain? Unbelievable. He shouldn't have made the journey at all. I don't think there was any security threat in Tain because the whole nation's attention was there and there was tight security in and around Tain. Kufuor and his people should make up better stories. And this was the same man who was inviting Nana Addo to concede the elections way before Dr. Afari Gyan came out with the provisional results.

Based on the above conclusions backed up with facts, I am sure you will agree with me that Kufuor did not do enough for Nana Addo and the NPP in the 2008 elections. I have recently read that Nana Addo disagrees with the conclusions I have drawn. It is not his place to agree. His hands are tied. He has the responsibility of uniting the party. By agreeing with my conclusions, he risks dividing the party and making Kufuor the only president from the NPP unpopular. In a nutshell, his agreement with my conclusions will be at a disadvantage to the party.

The elections (the Ashantis, rejected ballots, at the polling stations, the illiterates, the fantes and undecided voters)

I always thought elections were won by the number of votes a party received from the registered voters who went out and cast their ballot on Election Day. But in Africa and Ghana there is an election myth that figures are inflated and sometimes ballot boxes have ballot papers in them before they arrive at their polling stations. I am sure many of you believed this myth just as I did. Well guess what? That myth is a reality. As I sat in a lecture at the Ghana Law School at Makola, I was amazed to know that the myth was in fact a reality. In the words of the lecturer, elections are not won by you and I standing in a queue in the hot sun to cast our ballot for our political party or the candidate we think deserves our mandate. Rather, winning an election in Ghana depends on which party can cheat best. Clearly the NDC were professionals at that. One thing we can be proud of as Ghanaians is the maturity of our democracy. However, we still have a long way to go. Like I stated earlier on, tribalism is very alive in Ghanaian politics and the 2008 elections confirmed that. Ghana is being congratulated all over the world for conducting such peaceful elections. Well, all over the world except in Africa. Africans especially Nigerians continually classify the NPP as 'fools' for being an incumbent government which couldn't steal the election in the first round when the difference was only 1% (more or less). They simply can't comprehend how the NPP will allow an election to get into a run-off by just 1%. That is because the NPP understands what democracy means and holds the electoral process in high regard.

Can we blame the Ashantis or the people in Kumasi for our loss? Ashanti Region is the NPP's stronghold and we are always confident when the results come in from Bantama, Nhyieso, Suame, Manhyia and other constituencies. The day before the first round elections, drivers who were illegally parked and traders who were trading at inappropriate places in Kumasi were asked to leave the area. They got infuriated by this action and decided not to vote at all. In fact this resulted in the low turnout in the Ashanti Region in the first round. Maybe and even probably, if the Ashantis had voted in the first round, the NPP and Nana Addo would have had the one touch victory they were looking for. It is likely that the Akyems will return the favor should Alan Cash be nominated as the presidential candidate for the NPP in 2012. Hence, I suggest that Nana Addo should remain as the NPP's presidential candidate in 2012 if we want to win.

The number of rejected ballots and spoiled votes in the first round exceeded 200,000. This was the second highest number of spoilt ballots since 1992. And back then NDC won as well. Do you perceive what I am driving at? Some people have dismissed Dr. Apraku's accusations and assertions. They have actually ridiculed his allegations. His allegation was that those who counted the ballots had some special ink in their hair. And anytime they passed their hand through their hair and held the ballot paper, the ballot paper became void. Others have blamed lack of education on the part of the EC. I think it is all rubbish. The voters clearly knew what finger to vote with. The number of spoilt ballots is so large that the lack of education argument doesn't stand or make any sense. Voting is not a new thing in Ghana. We've been voting since 1992. I actually agree with Dr. Apraku on this one. Only because most of the spoilt ballots actually belonged to Nana Addo. And those were enough to give him the one touch victory he sought. It could have been the strategy the NDC employed with the sole purpose of pushing the elections to the second round.

What happened at the polling stations is appalling. Most of the officials at the polling stations belonged to the NDC. I single out a constituency in Accra where out of 19 polling stations, 18 EC officials belonged to the NDC. The only EC official who belonged to the NPP was challenged as being biased because of her political affiliation. Nonetheless, she stood her ground and asked whether any of the other officials had no party affiliations. This saved her from being removed as an official. In the Volta Region, all the EC officials there were NDC supporters. The NPP polling agents were actually chased out of the stations. This was the basis of our cry of electoral fraud. We went to the extent of invoking the courts. But then I remember reading on the NPP website that it was only a reckless party that would not send party agents to the polling stations and later made accusations of electoral fraud. This was exactly what the NPP were doing; acting contrary to their words. I knew the court action would be unsuccessful so I was the least surprised when it was withdrawn from court. We were crying electoral fraud when our own party agents had signed the results. The results coming out of the Volta Region especially from areas such as Ketu South were ridiculous. Firstly, not that many people live in Ketu South; and secondly they had a massive turnout in the first round so the turnout in the run-off was definitely tantamount to electoral fraud. What the party agents should have done was to refuse to sign the results. This brings me to another reason why I think Kufuor did not do enough for Nana Addo and the NPP. Knowing how the results from the Volta Region are always outrageous, he should have increased the security in the Volta Region. Maybe he did. But I don't believe it was enough.

One thing I noticed was that the illiterates voted massively for the NDC. They had no idea why they were voting. They were voting because they wanted change. What kind of change? I asked some of the voters what kind of change they sought. They couldn't tell me. It sounded as if this election was a joke to them. They didn't understand why we needed to change governments. This led me to advocate for qualified voting which was met with a lot of criticisms. I have touched on the fante factor so I won't repeat myself here. Except that the fantes have shown that in any election, the candidate they vote for is the candidate who becomes president and as such they should not be taken for granted. One last point under this heading is that once the undecided voters realized that people were voting massively for the NDC, they joined those people in the second round and increased Atta Mills' votes. I know the NPP's stronghold is in the Ashanti Region and especially the constituencies I mentioned. Why did it take so long for those results to come in? It appeared as if the NPP were out to cheat hence they withheld the election results from Kumasi in order to inflate them.

Even more astonishing is this theory. Nearly half of the country if not half of the country live in the Ashanti and Eastern Regions. I say this because these are the only two regions where the NPP had a majority. The NPP is fortunate that Ghanaian elections are not conducted as the US elections otherwise the NDC would have had the mandate of eight regions. Picture this: if the NPP had obtained the same percentage of votes in the Ashanti Region or Eastern Region as the NDC obtained in the Volta Region, the NPP would have won the election. And that would have been a majority in only two regions.

Complacency

I saved the primary reason for last. Complacency was the main reason why we lost the election. We thought we had it in the bag. We were not as vigilant and aggressive as the NDC were. In fact they ensured that they were not bullied or cheated at all. And when it came to deciding who the better cheat was, they played their cards well. They campaigned vigorously and used every trick in the political book. Both positive and negative. They dwelt on the illiterates and the fante fishermen along the coast. They capitalized on the few mishaps of the Kufuor administration and painted the NPP as a party of crooks. We just sat there and watched. We could say Ghanaians are ungrateful. We gave them free health; free ante natal and post natal for pregnant women; free education; better roads; a stable macro economy; a stable currency and these are just a few of the notable things of the NPP administration. In the Central Region, numerous schools were built and refurbished; the Cape Coast road was maintained to ensure that the route that claimed the lives of travelers was once again safe and yet the fantes refused to vote for us. These were the reasons why we lost. We knew we had done all these things for the Ghanaian people. Reassuring us that there was no way they will compare the two main parties, NPP and NDC, and vote the NDC. That is where we were wrong. There was little or no campaign in the Central Region. Blame the MPs? I already did that. Even when we were losing, we were confident that we had won the election. We thought we didn't need votes we actually needed. It was this complacency that drove us to court to seek an injunction on grounds any election lawyer would have known was without merit.

If we want to come back in 2012, we have a long way to go. We have to convince the fante people to vote us back into power. That will be an extremely difficult task considering how they would be aware that every president enjoys two terms. They will be less likely to remove one of their own from power. Our campaign will need a new strategy and dimension. It should be more dynamic and should involve the younger generation not boring old folk like Dr. Apraku and Obetsebi-Lamptey. We should include the local people and the illiterates (since qualified voting is not in place) in our campaigns. They should not feel left out. We should concentrate less on NDC strongholds like the Volta Region and the three northern regions because no matter the extent of your campaign in those regions and the development projects you set up in those regions, they will always vote NDC. We should not take for granted our own strongholds and battlegrounds such as Greater Accra and Brong Ahafo. And finally, we should have more vigilant and aggressive party agents at polling stations. Especially in the Volta Region and if possible provide these party agents with security. With these corrections in place, I have no doubt that the NPP will return to power in 2012.

Written and Edited by Kow A. Essuman Esq. LL.B. Hons, Barrister. All comments, corrections and contributions should be sent to kaessuman@yahoo.com.

Why We Lost the 2008 Elections (Draft)

2009-01-20T12:44:00.001Z

Maybe it is too late to point fingers, pin blames or even say 'I told you so'. So do we leave it as it is? I think not. People need to realise that for the party to move forward as we said in our campaign, a number of issues need to be addressed. This short article is meant to highlight the reasons why the NPP lost the 2008 election. It is worth noting that the reasons are not limited to the ones mentioned. Thus, I welcome any other reasons. The supporters in Kumasi have made it clear that Nana Addo should be the presidential candidate representing the NPP in the 2012 election. I agree with them and I am sure supporters around the country feel the same about Nana Addo. The supporters in Kumasi say that because presidential candidates are known to run twice. And presidents tend to enjoy two terms. So will Atta Mills and the NDC remain in power till 2016? Possibly. Hence we need to address the issues underlying our defeat in the 2008 election. So then was the loss an internal loss or an external loss? I think it was a mixture of both; with the internal factor dominating. There are different ways of telling the story but I think a chronological outline will be the best. So enjoy and remember to drop your two cents.

The running mate/vice president selection

Dr. Mahamadu Bawumia? Who is he? I am sure many people can read out his curriculum vitae and tell me who he is at the moment. I challenge those who can that as at August 2008 they had no idea who Bawumia was. This is when I can confidently say I told you so. If anyone remembers my facebook status after Bawumia was picked then you would know what I am talking about. Nana Addo received many recommendations for vice president. Some party leaders think his selection of Bawumia demonstrated his lack of leadership skills. Others like Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey defended Nana Addo's pick. Other members of the party who supported Nana Addo's pick argued that it was a good pick because Bawumia was not your ordinary politician. In fact he was not a politician at all. Does any remember when he was introduced at the Takoradi rally? All I said was a lot of work needs to be done. Look at Mills' pick for running mate; John Mahama. He was actually picked before Bawumia was picked. The point I am making here is that technocrats like Bawumia are not used to win an election. Bawumia's pick was an entirely wrong decision in my opinion. Now it has cost him his job as deputy governor of the Bank of Ghana.

Now let us take a look at the recommendations Nana Addo had for running mate. As early as April, chiefs in the central region and other prominent members of society advised Nana Addo to pick a running mate from the central region. Many people argued that chiefs should not involve themselves in politics. Why not? Are they not citizens of the country? In any event, the chiefs or togbui as they are referred to in the Volta Region contributed to the success of the NDC in that region. Besides, the chiefs in the central region were politically right for making such suggestions. Nana Addo was in a presidential election contest with his two main opponents being citizens of the central region. For those who advocate that tribalism has no room in politics. I beg you to wake up and smell reality. The 2008 presidential election has confirmed the already existing principle that tribalism is essential in Ghanaian politics. The fantes have been left out of Ghanaian politics. They have been taken for granted by politicians who have forgotten that the fight for Ghana's independence and politics started with the Fante Confederation in 1868.

The NDC were wise and played on this. Mills a citizen of the central region from Komenda was their presidential candidate. To be fair, his hopes for presidency commenced in 2000 where he lost to Kufuor. Yet, he never changed his slogan: 'adze wo fie a oye' (it's good to have something at home). He capitalized on this phrase and of course he received support from his people who without a doubt agreed with him. Nana Addo may have his reasons for not selecting a running mate from the central region or even the western region. The fantes may have voted massively for the NPP even though they would be second in command. At least they would appreciate the fact that the NPP considered the fantes in their administration. So politically, Nana Addo's pick for running mate was wrong.

Remember the Alan Cash camp? Well, they believed that Nana Addo will return the honourable act by Alan Cash and select Alan Cash as his running mate. Was this wishful thinking; maybe. But they had a right to think along those lines. The party was split in two camps. What better way to unite the party than to reach out to the leader of the other camp? Maybe Nana Addo had justifications for not selecting Alan Cash. They could include Alan Cash's political views or many other personal reasons. Nana Addo took a page out of Obama's book and decided not to select Alan Cash as his running mate just as Obama refused to select Hillary as his running mate. But then Obama ended up selecting an eminent politician as a running mate and not an unknown technocrat. Bottom line, Nana Addo's failure to select Alan Cash as his running mate ticked off some loyal supporters of the party who had second thoughts regarding his leadership abilities.

Why We Lost the 2008 Elections (Draft)

2009-01-19T15:14:00.001Z

Nominating the presidential candidate

So how did this affect the party in the 2008 elections? Well, the numerous aspirants had followers. I single out Kwabena Adjei Adjepong and Alan Kyeremanten. Kwabena Adjei left with some of his supporters, formed his own political party and contested in the 2008 elections. On Alan Kyeremanten, he was the first runner up in the nomination for presidential candidates. In other words, he did way better than the names I mentioned in the previous paragraph. Why did he do so well? Remember the name: 'Alan Cash'. His campaign for presidential candidate was all about money. And you know how Ghanaians 'love' the word money. In fact everyone loves money. Besides he had the backing of the ex president Kufuor. Was Kufuor's support for Alan Cash warranted? Many top or old members of the NPP thought and still think otherwise. Firstly, Kufuor was aware of the significant contribution that Nana Addo and the other names mentioned in the previous paragraph had made to the party. Even at times when it was dangerous (personally, politically and asset wise) to have political affiliations other than with the NDC. Secondly, Kufuor's campaign for presidency in 1996 and 2000 was not a money based campaign. He had financial support from all arms of the party. People made personal and financial sacrifices because it was not about money. So then why was Kufuor supporting Alan Cash? I guess that question will never be answered. But in my opinion, the party's division started from then.

Two camps emerged from that convention. The Nana Addo camp and the Alan Cash camp. Nana Addo failed to attain the required votes to lead the party in the 2008 elections under the NPP's constitution. If my memory serves me right, I think Justice Kpegah took issue with this after the 2008 election run-off. Well, there was meant to be a run-off between Nana Addo and Alan Cash. However, Alan Cash conceded and Nana Addo was nominated to lead the party in the 2008 presidential election. It was an honourable thing Alan Cash did but did that affect the party? Should there have been a run-off? I personally think a run-off was unnecessary but I am sure members in the Alan Cash camp had a different view. I will explore how the view manifested later on. This was just the beginning of the loss in the 2008 election.

The Chix Files

Prove Human Logic Wrong

Prove Human Logic Wrong

Temporary Defeats

The Media is failing in its Role in National Development

Do You To The Benefit of Others and Mankind

Individual Ability is Only One Factor in Success

Judging on Appearance

First Springs of Great Events

Judging People

Review of Kwaw Ansah's 'The Good Old Days "The Love of AA"'

What is the NDC all about?

The Liverpool Saga

Once Bitten, Never Shy…

NPP Youth UK Meeting

An Invitation to Join the Youth in Building Ghana

African Politics does not need Pensioners.

The Mills Administration is not committed to the greater interest of Ghana

A Brilliant Illustration of Handsfree

Reasons to VOTE LABOUR on 6 MAY 2010.

A Memorial to a Hero Needs Your Support!

The Financial Services Authority v Amro International and Goodman Jones LLP (interested party)

The independence of Ghana: The truncated African vision and the way forward – By Kwame E. Bidi

Big Money Returns to American Politics: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

The Independence of Ghana Is Still Meaningless Unless...

The Apple - HTC Beef

My People And Reductions...

Sharing is a two way street

My Review of Calvin Klein Crave Eau de Toilette Spray 75ml

“Asesa Anaa” (Review of 2009) by Kow Essuman

An Objective Analysis of the Overdraft Fees Case

History in SA 2010

More Labour Trouble

Alicia Keys - Try Sleeping With A Broken Heart

The So Called Porn Movie

Parents Just Don't Listen

In the 24th Year

Bailout, bailout, bailout...Restructuring

Jay-Z feat. Alicia Keys - Empire State of Mind

Rights and Responsibilities – A Birdie Story (Part 2)

Rights and Responsibilities – A Birdie Story (Part 1)

God's Love Story

The Joy of Education

Relationships and the Level of Jealousy

The Standard of Cheating in Relationships

Just a few observations … Happy 49th Independence Day to all Nigerians

Issues Surrounding the Arrest and Detention of Asabee by the BNI

Introduction

Facts

Arguments

Conclusion

Tribalism in politics: NPP needs to wipe the slate clean

Introduction

"National" to "New"

Asante – Akyem Rivalry

"Patriotic" in NPP

Final Thoughts

Ex-Gratia - Mills’ Suspension of the Package is Ultra Vires and Unconstitutional

Introduction

Arguments

Conclusion

Parents Play a Role in Youth Crime in an Area

Ghana at 52

Alan Will Be a Wrong Choice for the 2012 Election

Why We Lost the 2008 Elections

Nominating the presidential candidate

The running mate/vice president selection

The campaign

The presidential factor

The elections (the Ashantis, rejected ballots, at the polling stations, the illiterates, the fantes and undecided voters)

Complacency

Why We Lost the 2008 Elections (Draft)

The running mate/vice president selection

Why We Lost the 2008 Elections (Draft)

Nominating the presidential candidate