Speech By Prof M.A. Ocquaye at the NPP's 21st Anniversary Lectures.

 

THE NEW PATRIOTIC PARTY (NPP) AND THE DANQUAH-BUSIA-DOMBO TRADITION’S CONTRIBUTION TO THE ESTABLISHMENT AND DEEPENING OF THE DEMOCRATIC CULTURE AND PRACTICE IN GHANA”
 A PAPER DELIVERED @ THE PARTY’S 21ST ANNIVERSARY LECTURE @ THE OSU PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH HALL ON THURSDAY 22ND AUGUST 2013
BY
HON. PROF. MIKE OQUAYE
Introduction
This presentation attempts a bird’s eye view of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo(DBD) tradition from 1947 to this day. It presents an opportunity to ask:
Who are we? Politically, where do we come from? What was the tradition’s contribution in the founding of the Ghanaian state? What principles underpin the tradition? What political parties have represented the tradition and how have they interacted with other political parties in our history? How have we performed in government and what are our contribution to democracy, good governance, human rights, the rule of law, and socio-economic development? Finally, what lies ahead of us?

Moving Towards Nationhood

In 1821, the British directly assumed control of the Gold Coast (ie the Gold Coast Colony). The Bond of 1844 regularised the judicial authority the British was exercising. The Bond of 1844 made the nationalist struggle in Ghana a totally different proposition. Our nationalist struggle may be seen in two dimensions – first, the leaders between 1844 – 1945 (also referred to as the proto-nationalist era); and second, the period between 1945 -57 – the era of full scale nationalism, spearheaded initially by the United Gold Coast Convention (UGCC) and later by other parties, the Convention People’s Party (CPP) and the Northern People’s Party (NPP) etc.

The detailed periods are summarized below. The leading figures who came from the so-called elite must be acknowledged in letters of gold. Ghana was not built in a day and there was no single founder.

i.)    1844–73: Period of British protection around the coast; no participation of the Gold Coasters in governance as in other colonies.

ii.)    1874–97: Period of demands for political participation. Legislative Council established with African representation though British Officials had the majority. Throughout Africa, this was a novelty and it was because our people were getting educated and were agitating for self government.

iii.)    1900-1924: this was the period of further increase in African representation on the Legislative Council. Official representation reduced in proportion drastically.

iv.)    1925-45: this was the golden age of proto-nationalism by the progenitors of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition. The Colonial Secretary reported to London that the educated elite and mullatoes had become a menace, heightening agitation for independence. The franchise was introduced into the Gold Coast and the first African to cast a ballot in Black Africa was in the Gold Coast. All these were done with a view to transfer political power. The future leaders of the UGCC were maturing in the political vineyard.

v.)    1946-57: this was the period of consolidation. We had a new Constitution with African elected majority in the Assembly by the end of 1951. Ashanti was included in the Legislature. The principle of Cabinet responsibility was introduced for the first time.

In view of various attempts to contort the history of this nation and take away the credit of the Founding Fathers of Ghana; in view of attempts to degrade the real heroes of Ghana’s independence who met in Saltpond on 4th August 1947; in view of the injustice done to men like Paa Grant, J.B. Danquah, William Ofori-Atta, Edward Akufo-Addo, Ako Adjei, R.S. Blay and others, it is imperative to echo loudly that Nkrumah was not the Founder of Ghana. The progenitors of the NPP founded Ghana and Nkrumah who had been invited by these unsung heroes, became one of the Founding Fathers by courtesy of that invitation. This issue will the discussed in full on this occasion.

The Founding Fathers

A recap of the chronology of events shows that before the arrival of Nkrumah, some gallant men were taking steps to lead Ghana to independence and in fact a number of political parties were formed soon after the end of the Second World War in 1945.

Kwame Nkrumah left for US in 1935. He studied and worked in US and England. He returned to Ghana in December 1947 on the invitation of the UGCC leaders who paid Nkrumah's fare, expenses etc. He was the only person on salary in the UGCC. If something had not been founded, what was Nkrumah brought down for? If there was nothing, what was he to come and help to consolidate?

The cry for independence reached full blast after the 1948 riots. On 28th February 1948 when the Ex-servicemen marched to the Castle and shooting took place there was enough political consciousness in Ghana! The cry for independence had been resonating from 1945 to 1948. What magic could Nkrumah alone have done from December 1947 (when he arrived in Ghana) to February 1948 (when agitation reached its apogee) if there was nothing worthwhile on the ground?

Some people have regrettably asked: How can we have more than one founder? To such compatriots, I humbly lend this advice: Foundership need not be perceived in monoistic terms. Every year, Achimotans celebrate the founding fathers - Aggrey, Fraser, Guggisberg. In Ashanti, we have Osei Tutu and Okomfo Anokye. In the U.S.A., Washington is not the founder. They have Founding Fathers.

And you do not have to be a founder for your greatness to be recognized or given a holiday. Martin Luther King (USA) is an example. Nkrumah may be honoured with a holiday as First Prime Minister and first President. He also did a lot for Ghana regarding education, health, Akosombo Dam, Tema motoway etc. But we should have a real Founders’ Day to honour ALL the real founding fathers, including Nkrumah. The next NPP government must see to this.

Some have said Nkrumah was founder because of the declaration he made on the Old Polo Grounds - Ghana, your beloved country is free for ever. Some people do not know that this event was essentially a CPP rally and not the declaration of independence which was done by the Duchess of Kent on behalf of Queen Elizabeth II later in the National Assembly. So assuming that before that old polo grounds rally, Nkrumah was indisposed and Mr K.A. Gbedemah had made that statement, would Gbedemah have become the founder of Ghana? This argument is, to say the least, unfortunate. I feel sad that our history is sometimes toyed with. No teacher should ever teach again that independence was proclaimed or declared by Nkrumah at old polo grounds. If that had been so, it would have amounted to the Unilateral Declaration of Independence which happened only in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) under Ian Smith.

Ghanaians must know exactly where we are coming from; so that the past should be a guide to the present and the future. We should give credit to our forebears who signed the Bond of 1844 on 6th March 1844, for example. They established a contractual relationship between the Gold Coast and the British.

Soon after 1944, our leaders could demand; “white man, time is up. Go home!” This is what Paa Grant, Danquah and others did.

We should recognize 4th August 1947 as the founding of the ultimate independence movement. That day the UGCC was inaugurated in Saltpond. It was a Broad Movement of Chiefs, clergymen, lawyers, professionals, business men, teachers etc. “It marked the beginning of a new era in the Gold Coast”, said one historian. Saltpond was the headquarters of the Joint Provincial Council of Chiefs and that is why the meeting took place there. It was a unity movement which incorporated all existing groups, e.g Obetsebi Lamptey’s League of the Gold Coast, Danquah’s Youth Conference etc. Paa Grant was Chairman, Danquah was the Political Leader.

Danquah made the Declaration of Self Emancipation. This became the cornerstone of the New Ghana. Something happened in Ghana akin to what took place in the USA. People should know that even though Americans declared independence on July 4, 1776, it was not until 1787 that the US Constitution came into force. Those who made that Declaration of Independence are all Founding Fathers in America.

Ghana’s Famous Declaration was made in 1947 by Danquah (who the British came to declare as the Doyen of Gold Coast politicians). Nkrumah was not in the country at all. The great leader said: “We have come from all the corners of this country… (to decide) how we are to be governed, a new kind of freedom, a Gold Coast liberty.

We left our homes in Ghana and came down here to build for ourselves a new home: There is one thing we brought with us from ancient Ghana (870 years ago). We brought with us our ancient freedom. Today the safety of that freedom is threatened; has been continuously threatened for 100 years; since the Bond of 1844 and the time has come for a decision”.

The decision was taken that day. The Gold Coast should be free and translated into the modern Ghana. The seed was duly sown. And Nkrumah was not only physically in the UK, but also he made no input whatsoever.

Nkrumah came and added bountifully to it. And Nkrumah was a great man. But he was not in Ghana when it all started. Nkrumah was not the Founder! Danquah conceived the idea of calling the independent Gold Coast, Ghana. This was formally adopted in Saltpond. It became known to every school child then that our nation would soon become independent; that our leaders were fighting for this; and the name of the new nation would be Ghana. And all this happened before Nkrumah arrived. And not even Nkrumah could have resiled from this when independence arrived.

Ghana is known in our history. Danquah gave it the nationalistic interpretation – hence our name.

When Nkrumah said on the eve of Independence that our beloved country Ghana was free for ever, he was putting the icing on the cake. But there were other bakers of the cake. Can you forget them? No. Our independence was gained more with brain than with brawn. This must be acknowledged.

Tetteh Quashie’s cocoa had made the economy strong. The Gold Coasters were far more educated than any part in Black Africa. The economy was booming with gold, diamond, manganese, bauxite, timber etc. Escott Reid observed Ghana had the highest per capita income in Africa South of the Sahara (white south Africans apart). 

After the 1948 Riots it was J. B. Danquah who sent that famous Cable to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, saying the colonial administration had collapsed. He made specific demands as leader of the independence movement. He asked for the recall of the Governor. Danquah called for an interim government run by the UGCC. He proclaimed a Constituent Assembly to draw a new Constitution for self government.

In his historic telegram, addressed to all the Chiefs and people of the Gold Coast, it was Danquah who declared “The Hour of Liberation Has struck””. Danquah wrote: “Inheritors of Ghana’s ancient Kingdom. My message as you see, is not moved by fear. Aggrey blotted fear from our dictionary. ‘Eagle fly for thou art not a chick’”. In 1948 Danquah boldly declared that the eagle would be an emblem of the new Ghana.

Before Nkrumah arrived, our name had been chosen by the nationalist leaders at Saltpond. The Founding Fathers also chose the Eagle as our national emblem. The national colours- red, yellow and green- had been discussed at length and accepted. Later, Ms. Okoh was to design it into a befitting flag.  Nkrumah changed the flag in 1964. He substituted the national colours with what he desired all along - red, white and green - the CPP colours. This also brought loads of acrimony. The original flag was brought back only when Nkrumah was overthrown.

Indeed, the anthem which was composed by the legendary Gbeho, had words which explained the colours thus: “red for the blood of the HEROES (not hero) in the fight; green for the precious farms of our birth-right, and linked with these  the shining golden band, that marks the richness of our fatherland.” What Nkrumah added to the flag was the Black Star which he borrowed from the Black Star Line of Marcus Garvey.

When the nationalist leaders met in Saltpond in 1947, they further agreed that anytime independence was gained , the date should be 6th March. Why? Because the Bond of 1844 was dated 6th March 1844. So our release from the Bond should coincide with the date accordingly. Who did this for Ghana? Danquah and Co.

Our forebears wanted independence and that is why they met in 1947. They discussed all those matters that concern a new nation and drew up a liberal Constitution which later became the 1969 Constitution in a revised form.

What We Stand For

It is important to ask: what did the leaders of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition stand for? Were they against Ghana becoming independent? Were they over-zealous to seek political power for themselves at all cost? Were there forebodings of authoritarianism and over-centralism between 1951-54 when Nkrumah became Leader of Government Business in the Gold Coast? If independence was coming, was it important to establish firmly the constitutional framework within which Ghana would be governed or this could be left ajar? Were there serious ideological differences in the Gold Coast at this time?  And how best could Nkrumah’s Socialist “centralism” be reconciled with the devolution of powers and human rights which the UGCC perceived and which is also the cornerstone of what the New Patriotic Party (NPP) today summarises as “Development in Freedom”? Are we bomb throwers and trouble makers?

These pertinent questions are being posited to help us explain the often-repeated fallacy that the leaders of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition were against independence; that they were nation-wreckers; that they were mere bomb throwers who compelled Nkrumah, the kind-hearted nationalist, to detain them by the Preventive detention Act (PDA)

Our Founding Fathers were liberal-minded, peaceful people. They were not bomb throwers as we shall illustrate. Did we force Nkrumah to be a dictator? The answer is No. It is only those who put the cart before the horse or are oblivious of the chronology of political events who will fall into such error.

In his autobiography, written in the early 1950s and published in 1957, Nkrumah advocated that liberal methods were not coterminous with rapid-development and that the establishment of the socialist rapid development state in Africa, required “emergency measures of a totalitarian kind”.

Several signs began to manifest themselves regarding this in-built philosophy. Indeed, as Busia was to remind Ghanaians, “nsuo beto a, mframa di kan” Before it rains; the wind first blows. Some saw the “mframa” ( wind) early at dawn; some saw it in the morning; others saw it at noon; some could not see the wind till it was evening; yet there were those who sat till the night came (including even Komla Agbeli Gbedemah, Nkrumah’s right hand man, who ran into exile at long last and only returned to Ghana after the 1966 coup).

Nkrumah hated any reference to fundamental human rights. Today, the fundamental human rights of Ghanaians are secure because when Akufo-Addo and others had the opportunity to write a Constitution for Ghana in 1969, they expressly provided for fundamental human rights. This was copied almost verbatim in the 1979 Constitution and also in the 1992 Constitution.

Hence, anytime a Ghanaian invokes his/her right to bail, the right against inhuman treatment etc, let that Ghanaian, no matter the political persuasion of that Ghanaian, pause a moment and appreciate the significance of the fundamental principle of our Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition.

Let us now take a look at attempts to assassinate Nkrumah. First, during colonial times, Nkrumah reported a fire in his house.  The colonial investigation did not point to arson as a cause. Yet Nkrumah always chose to make political capital out of the event by claiming that his enemies wanted to kill him.  Second, there was the alleged conspiracy by R. R. Amponsah, Modesto Apaloo and others to stage a coup.  If there was enough evidence in this connection, why did Nkrumah not try the offenders before the white judges? Why did he go on to rather have a Preventive Detention Act passed? Dennis Austin captured for posterity, the Minority Report by the Chairman of the three-member Committee who wrote: “(1) There was no conspirational association between Mr. Amponsah and Mr. Apaloo in association with Awhaitey” (the soldier who was supposed to lead the coup). “(2) There did not exist between Mr. Amponsah, Mr. Apaloo and Ahwaitey a plot to interfere in any way with the life or liberty of the Prime Minister of Ghana on the airport before his departure to India on the 20th December 1958”

The third alleged attempt was the shooting at Flagstaff House where it was alleged that a lone policeman had shot at Nkrumah and missed.  No member of the Opposition was in any way linked to the incident. Indeed, it was later reported that the would-be assassin had jumped to his death from a balcony at the Police Headquarters. 

Fourth, in 1962, the Kulungugu Incident occurred – the President was hit by a bomb and was wounded.  Incidentally, those put on trial were leading CPP people – Ako Adjei (Minister), Adamafio (Minister) and Crabbe (Secretary-General of the CPP). No leading member of the opposition was involved. Indeed, they were all in detention with Baffuor Osei Akoto or in exile with Busia.

The fact of the matter is that there was an open fight between the “Old Guards” (those Nkrumah started with) and the “Socialist Boys” (the new crop of younger ideologues and new entrants who had found fresh favour with Nkrumah). 

Nkrumah faced trouble from within the CPP. And how could the Kulungugu of 1962 lead to the PDA of 1958?  Nkrumah had his ambition to monopolise power and men like Baffuor Osei Akoto opposed him. Baffuor, Danquah, Busia, Dombo and others all wanted independence but not at any price!

Fellow countrymen and women, God is good. Latter events exonerated our leaders.  After the overthrow of Nkrumah, Akufo-Addo lived to give us the 1969 Constitution which was a charter of liberty and the bedrock of constitutionalism, good governance and human rights as a whole in Ghana today.

Formation of the NLM; Corruption etc

The formation of the National Liberation Movement (NLM) has been damned by opponents of the tradition. They say the era of 1954-56 was a mere struggle for power. This is wrong. There were serious issues of corruption, dictatorship etc at stake. Our leaders apposed these tendencies.

The 1954 Elections had been held in relative peace and it was to lead to independence.  Why was the National Liberation Movement (NLM) formed under the leadership of Baffuor Osei Akoto? The immediate cause was that the government pegged the cocoa price payable to farmers at 72 shillings a load instead of the 100 shillings the government had promised during the campaign. This was against the backdrop that the world cocoa price had increased to a record level. The government’s policy on cocoa was perceived as discrimination against farmers and the Ashanti Region.  It was felt that the absolute lack of consultation was evidence of the “over-centralist” and “over-weening” tendencies in Nkrumah. To add insult to injury serious corruption had emerged in the Cocoa Purchasing Company (CPC). Indeed the findings of the Jibowu Commission, headed by a Supreme Court Judge from Nigeria justified the concerns of Baffuor Osei Akoto and others. The report stated “inter alia:

1.    The allegation that the CPP controlled the CPC is justified;

2.    No direct proof was produced that CPC funds were used to finance the CPP. But we cannot be satisfied that loan monies might not have been used for other purposes;

3.    Loans were only given to farmers who were members of the pro-CPP United Farmers Council;

4.    Loans were given in excess of the fixed limits, and without regard to the authorized procedure;

5.    Bribery, corruption and extortion among some CPC officials existed;

6.    Repayment of loans had fallen greatly into arrears;

7.    CPC Funds had been used to secure farmers’ votes for the CPP.

8.    There was truth in the allegation that CPC purchased vehicles for CPP election campaign…..”

The abuse of CPC funds was an official policy of the CPP. It was like the GYEEDA of today! It showed how corruption had reared its ugly head.  It operated particularly against the farmers and our leaders were out to defend the farmers.  Evidence is found in the notorious statement of Krobo Edusei in the Assembly in March 1954. “The CPC is the product of a master brain, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, and it is the atomic bomb of the CPP. As Hon. Members are aware, the Prime Minister in his statement to the CPP told his party members that organization decided everything and the CPC is part of the organization of the CPP”.

The CPP quickly kicked against internal party democracy which is crucial in our tradition. In the 1954 Elections, candidates for the CPP had been selected from Accra, leading to protestations by a large number of “CPP Rebels” who attacked Nkrumah for dictatorial tendencies.

Notably, in 1964, under the One-Party System, all candidates for the CPP in an election where every CPP candidate went unopposed, were selected from Flagstaff House.

Indeed, MPs were allocated constituencies according to Nkrumah’s pleasure. Nkrumah said this was justified under the doctrine of “democratic centralism” as MPs were allocated constituencies they had never visited, nor lived in; nor hailed from. The aim was to destroy all loyalties and let everyone derive his position from Nkrumah.   Typically the 1992 Constitution provides that political parties in their internal organization and management, shall abide by democratic principles.  It is unconstitutional to hand-pick candidates or breach the provisions regulating geographical and other qualification of candidates.

Aims and Objectives of the NLM

The published aims and objects of the NLM reflected the objectives of the UGCC and the democratic principles the party has always stood for till today. The included the following:

•    To quicken the achievement of self-government and help build a prosperous, healthy, tolerant and God-fearing Nation;

•    To secure due recognition of the economic, social and cultural background of the respective regions of the Gold Coast and work out a federal or any better form of Constitution to give the country an effective voice in the regional and Central Government of the country;

•    To banish lawlessness, intimidation, hooliganism, disregard for age and authority, suppression of individual conscience and all traces of communism;

•    To establish respect for efficiency, integrity and honest labour;

•    To honour, respect and be loyal to our traditional rulers and uphold the best in our culture;

•    To encourage good neighbourliness among the people of the villages, towns and regions;

•    To safeguard the interest of farmers and workers;

•    To foster friendly relations between the Gold Coast and Commonwealth and other democratic nations.

From the early 1950s Nkrumah justified his condemnation of Western democracy with the argument that Ghana’s traditional system has one chief and monolithic not pluralistic in all its dimensions.  But our leaders saw it differently.  The Fante Confederacy, Ashanti Confederacy, and the Ga State knew of a system which contained States which are autonomous in many ways.  The head of the Union does not appoint the other chiefs. They assume their stools through the lineage system. In the words of Bowdich, the individual Ashanti chief “palatine privileges” even though the Asantehene possessed rights of over-lordship in respect of war service and other jurisdiction, through not in landholding.

Diffusion of power and decentralized authority were the essence of native administration. Notably, the Chief did not appoint the members of the Chief’s Council.  The members were all sub-chiefs who came to the Council as of right, being heads of lineages which made the township. Lands were owned by small chiefs “odikros” and heads of families owned lands and governed in their own mini-parameters. All roads never led to Rome as Nkrumah wanted all roads to lead to Accra. On the eve of independence, these were real issues. Our people wanted diffusion of power or countervailing authority. Our opponents did not understand. Curiously, today President Mahama and others are calling for power-sharing. When we asked for regional autonomy to ensure countervailing authority, they called our leaders nation wreckers.

It should also be remembered that the NLM essentially wanted guarantees to the liberty of the various regions/areas of Ghana. They actually called for federalism or regional devolution or any other arrangement that would recognize authority apart from the Centre. Apart from the size of the USA, the federalist arrangement was also to underscore the liberty of all who were coming into the Union. Switzerland is a small nation with a confederation Constitution which gives vast autonomy to the Cantons.

In Ghana itself, it should not be forgotten that as part of the pre-independence compromise, Regional Assemblies were established under the 1957 Constitution which paved the way for independence. Regrettably, within one year, Nkrumah had used the CPP majority to dissolve the Regional Assemblies. Today, as we struggle for the true decentralization, let us congratulate the founders of our tradition.

The Danquah-Busia-Dombo Tradition in Government

Ghanaians complain that we do not have enough to show for our independence since 1957. The answer is simple: The Danquah-Busia-Dombo Tradition has only governed for ten years and three months out of 57 years. President Kufuor put it right when he blamed our plight on poor leadership. He echoed that mentorship is crucial to good leadership. Of course he remembered his own tutorship under Busia, Paa Willie and Victor Owusu as Deputy Minister. I am firmly of the view that but for the Acheampong interruption, he would have been President ten years earlier, after systematic progression to Minister and then President. Talents were wasted for several years as good materials waited on the wings for 18 years of Rawlings PNDC/NDC rule.

Let me make a little point about mentoring. President Kufuor is on record recounting how Busia helped him get admitted to Oxford. So, Busia’s eyes on him went far. President Kufuor did same for some young people. Let us make serious mentoring a core policy to recognize young talents, and groom them actively for leadership.

The Busia Regime

The Busia era was a golden age of good governance to be guided by the 1969 Constitution also known as the Akufo-Addo Constitution. By the Preamble to the Constitution, the people of Ghana resolved never again to allow themselves to be subjected to tyrannical rule; and the Constitution ensured the sovereignty of the people, the Rule of Law and guaranteed fundamental human rights including FREEDOM of thought, expression and religion; JUSTICE to all men in every aspect of their lives-social, economic and political; RESPECT for the dignity of every individual and EQUALITY of opportunity. The Constitution provided that any activity of a person, persons, or group of persons which suppressed or sought to suppress lawful political activity of any other person or persons would be an unlawful act and gave the Supreme Court power to grant injunctions against offenders and punish them where necessary, even with imprisonment. In the light of this similar arrangement a new era of political freedom boomed and all opposition groups freely organized themselves and freely criticized the government and propagated their own idea.

The independence of the Judiciary was ensured and the Constitution provided that the judicial power of Ghana should be vested only in the Judiciary and no other body should have any final judicial power.

The Busia Administration that ruled Ghana from late 1969 to January, 1972, pursued a laissez-faire policy and upheld fundamental human rights and liberties. Nobody was detained for political reasons. Freedom of the Press flourished and the Opposition spoke freely both in Parliament and through several newspapers including the popular Spokesman. The government rightly saw rural development as crucial to economic growth, in that it would first of all lay the foundation for self-sufficiency in food. Secondly, it would prevent the drift of young men to urban areas in search for non-existing white collar jobs. Thirdly, it would boost the cocoa industry, the backbone of the nation’s economy by keeping the famers on the land and making them happy and content.

A ministry for rural development was established. An integrated waste management programme was commenced with Israeli support. It was abandoned by acheampong and we are paying for the consequences. Industries began to boom. Busia boldly tackled the currency disparities through devaluation which was misinterpreted by adventurers who deposed him by the gun. His successors were to devalue thousand times over the years.    

The Kufuor Administration

The Kufuor government displayed an excellent record of good governance. The separation of powers and the independence of the Judiciary and Legislature were respected. The Media never experienced such freedom. The Criminal Libel Law was repealed. The Rule of Law prevailed and fundamental human rights were respected. Corruption was tackled through institutional reforms. Good governance earned Ghana US$547 million from the US government through the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA). Which government earned such a colossal amount free of charge for Ghana for doing things right?

A few areas will be emphasised to showcase the Danquah-Busia-Dombo Tradition on wheels under the Kufuor administration.

Law and Order

Major reforms of the legal system were undertaken under Kufuor. These include:

•    Reducing significantly the delays in trials by automating the courts (Fast Track Courts) Some stood against this for personal reasons. Today we all see the good effect;

•    Using law as a tool for development by supporting the creation of commercial courts and the Business Law Division of the Attorney General's Department;

•    Using law as a tool for the promotion and protection of fundamental human rights and freedoms. For example, the right of freedom and expression by repealing the Criminal Libel Law;

•    The Judiciary, Military, Police and all law enforcement agencies have received the highest ever budgetary support to fulfil their mandate. Recruitment and service conditions received quantitative and qualitative boost.

We did the following for the Military.

•    The 37 Military Hospital was expanded and considerably refurbished. Today it provides about the finest medical services to both the military and civilians alike.

•    A second Military Hospital was planned for Kumasi and a loan secured.

•     The construction of the Burma Hall, the Ministry of Defence Building and the provision of a number of new residential buildings in all garrisons and the rehabilitation of old and dilapidated residential buildings have all gone a long way to boost the morale of soldiers.

•    An amount of US$60 million was provided to ensure that all Peacekeeping Missions are provided with sufficient equipment. An additional facility of US$100 million provided to equip the army.

•    Two planes bought to equip the Air Force and the Navy to ensure national security. We went for value for money. Those who condemned us have bought more planes and refused to do tender or value for money before purchase.

•    Adequate preparation made for release and resettlement of soldiers through training.

Economy

We are the people who boldly embraced HIPC and came out with flying colours. Our opponents condemned the move and walked out of Parliament. But NDC MPs soon saw the excellence in us as they ate humble pie and joined the band wagon for HIPC projects.

Upon assuming office in 2001, we inherited a tattered economy– GDP growth rate was 3.7%; Inflation stood at 41%; On the interest rate front, the Bank of Ghana Base rate was over 50% with the 91-Day Treasury Bill Rate at 40.5%. Total Debt as a ratio of Gross Domestic Product stood at 189%. International Reserves stood at US$ 253 million, adequate for three weeks of import cover.

Under Kufuor inflation was brought down to 18% by 2008 in spite of the serious rise in global oil and food.

By 2008, the interest rate front, the Bank of Ghana Base rate stood at a mere 17% while the 91-Day Treasury Bill rate declined to 24%. This made it possible to expand total credit to the private sector from 12.5% of GDP in 2000 to 28.4% of GDP in 2007. With the cost of borrowing reduced significantly, the private sector was in a better position to access credit to expand their businesses.

We improved our external reserve position from US$ 253 million in 2000 to US$ 2.3 billion (equivalent of three months cover) as at year end 2007. There was no oil then! Given oil, we say that Ghana should give us the administration and free SHS is possible.

One problem with the NDC from 2009 is that they did not know how to manage such a gargantuan economy with oil money on top. All they could see was, create, loot and share. It was not for nothing that in our time, Banks were inviting people for loans. And the domestic gas people were tooting car horns for people to come for gas in front of their gates. You know the difference? It is qualitative management of limited resources.

Through the bold HIPC arrangements, which resulted in an external forgiveness of some US$ 5 billion and the restructuring of the maturity profile of our external debt, Ghana's total debt service declined from 15.6% in 2000 to 4.9% by year end 2006. The greatly reduced debt burden on the economy released significant amounts of scarce foreign exchange resources, which would otherwise have been used to service these debts, for construction of roads, hospitals, schools and meeting other social needs of our people.

The ultimate proof of our superior management of the Ghanaian economy has been our ability to grow the economy, in nominal GDP terms, from US$ 3.9 billion in 2000 to US$ 16.3 billion in 2008. In this process, per capita income in 2008 was nearly US$ 600 as compared to a little over US$ 300 in 2000. As a result, poverty levels were cut by over a third – from 39% of the population in1998/1999 to 28% by 2006/2007.

These spectacular successes engendered that invisible factor which is vital in economics- confidence in the Ghanaian economy. It made possible the significant inflows of foreign direct investment, particularly in the banking, energy, and oil and gas exploration fields.  Pensioners, workers and beggars all began to feel a difference in their lives. This is why people are moaning today.

Developing Rural North

The NPP Government initiated the Northern Rural Growth Programme (NRGP) with a budget of US$103 million. It was to cover 32 out of 34 districts of the three northern regions of Ghana with the aim of improving the living standards of rural residents.

The NDC re-named the project and have nothing to show today apart from less than 100 guinea fowls.

Industry

In industry, the Kufuor government supported the export sector with more aggressive export promotion activities. For example, from 2002, the Export Development and Investment Fund (EDIF) invested nearly ¢700 billion in export promotion with 28% going into agro-processing. We also reduced corporate tax from 35%. These taxes have not only increased but now ones have been imposed on cutlasses and condoms. These were all done in the government's pursuit of making the private sector the major force behind the growth of our economy. As a result of these reforms, the country was adjudged as one of the top ten countries with the most reformed economy in the world to do business in. Ghana was recognised as a fully fledged "emerging economy" with the concomitant record inflows of foreign direct investment (FDI). Our middle income status was recognized and our President later given a global prize.

Education  

We have reformed the structure and content of basic education to include 2 years of kindergarten. The School Feeding Programme, Capitation Grant and free Metro Bus rides for children brought children into the classroom and improved Girl child Education. In 2008, enrolment in public basic school stood at almost 5 million compared to 2.7 million in 2000. Pre-School enrolment doubled. Primary school and Junior High School enrolment increased by 50%. Senior High School enrolment more than doubled (See table below).

Level                     No. of Schools                                     Enrolment

                         2000/01         2007/08                   2000/01               2007/08

Pre-School        5,976            11,140                         649,677               1,258,483

Primary            11,916           13,247                      2,477,990             3,622,724 

JHS                  6,133             7,267                         804,419                1,224,964

SHS                 474                 493                            204,000               454,681

Teachers at the basic school level were paid five times more than what they were paid in the year 2000.

Enrolment in public universities more than doubled – from 40,670 in 2000/01 to 88,445 in 2006/07. Enrolment in polytechnics also rose by more than 50% in that period from 18,470 in 2000/2001 to 28,695 in 2006/2007.

Level                     No. of Institutions          Enrolment

                         2000/01        2007/08      2000/01      2007/08          % increase

University          5                   6                40,670         88,445                 117%

Private Univ.      4                  16               1,667           18,278                 996%

Polytechnic         10                10               18,470         28,695                 55%

Professional Ins.  3                 3                 2,013            4,350                  116%

Health

The NPP Kufuor-led Government introduced the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) in 2003 to replace the inhumane "cash-and-carry" system under the NDC. The NHIS was first mooted in 1970 by the Progress Party under Professor K.A. Busia who constituted a committee headed by Dr. Konotey Ahulu to study the concept and make appropriate recommendations. The NHIS, by 2008 covered about half the population (11.3 million Ghanaians). The NHIS provided free healthcare for children below 18 and the elderly over the age of 70. Over 6 million children and 400,000 elderly also benefited from the service. All pregnant women also had free maternal care. Under the NHIS, HIV positive individuals also received highly subsidised anti-retroviral medicines.

The introduction of the NHIS led to a three-fold increase in hospital attendance in some areas.

The NDC walked out of Parliament when the programme was being debated. Soon, they were grabbing the benefits.

Energy

Bui Dam, which was the dream of Governor Guggisberg in the 1920s, became a reality under the NPP government. President Kufuor cut the sod for work to begin at the site in August 2007.

The recent oil discovery in our deep waters off-shore was not by accident. We struck oil because of the sound policies of the NPP government. The oil had always been there but the 19 years of (P) NDC rule could neither create the conducive investment climate nor the managerial direction for the oil to be found. The NPP government restructured and refocused the work of the GNPC and provided the conducive business environment to attract committed investors to our off-shore oil fields.

Fighting Corruption

Corruption constitutes a social canker and must be dealt with. The NPP believes that corruption is not combated with mere slogans but by comprehensive policy measures and action. By December 2000, the NDC had given up on the fight against corruption. The President at that time told Parliament that "government on its part has extended an invitation to the World Bank to conduct a diagnostic study on corruption in Ghana and how it can be mitigated if not eradicated" (Hansard 13th January 2000, Col. 112).

The NPP government fought corruption with policies including:

•    stimulation of transparency and freedom to write about actions of officials following the repeal of the Criminal libel Law

•      enhancement of the Procurement Act to check abuse in public procurement

•    maintenance of probity and elimination of payroll abuse through the Financial Administration Act and Internal Audit Act

•     Unprecedented empowerment of the anti-corruption agencies, CHRAJ, Police, Serious Fraud Office (SFO), and the courts.

Others

Ghana went beyond 750,000 metric tonnes in cocoa production through good policies injected into the industry which our political opponents condemned.

A three thousand tractors supply was arranged from India. A Tractor Assembly Plant was commenced in Tema. It is now abandoned because the NDC government will not appreciate the vision.

The Danquah-Busia-Dombo Tradition and the Electoral Process.

The essence of the political game and the competitive process inherent in politics have an ultimate goal-to win elections and have the opportunity to implement one’s political vision or agenda.

In 1951, the British held elections to enable Africans practice the game and prepare for self government. The CPP won over the UGCC and Nkrumah became Leader of Government Business.

In 1954, elections were held again with one aim: the British would hand over to the winner. Our tradition contested the elections as Ghana Congress Party (GCP) and lost heavily. All our leading politicians failed tragically except Busia.

In the Ashanti Region ( which then included Brong Ahafo) Busia won a lone seat for us, beating C.E. Donkor with only eleven (11) votes. Victor Owusu, Joe Appiah and others were with CPP and won seats for them.

This tragedy could have sounded the death knell of the tradition but for the fact that the CPP’s dictatorial tendencies began to show. The CPP scorned the famous farmers and put the cocoa price at 72 shillings a load while the world price had shot up tremendously. The Party picked its 1954 candidates from Accra and disregarded internal party democracy, thus creating the well-known CPP rebels. These people had helped win the 1951 elections for the CPP and now they were being shown the essence of socialist “democratic centralism”. Nkrumah had threatened the chiefs of Ghana and treated them with contempt. He was becoming a socialist despot .

Hence, the National Liberation Movement (NLM) reared its head led by Baafour Osei Akoto. The demand for federalism was a power-sharing cry which came out of suspicion. The colonial government would not have minded the NLM but for death in an accident of the CPP Member for Atwima-Nwabiagya. In the ensuing bye-election the NLM won overwhelmingly. The opposition demanded that the CPP had lost its mandate and that if a fresh election was held, the CPP would lose.

The colonial government called a fresh election and the CPP won 72 out of 104 seats. Hence, Nkrumah became Prime Minister and led Ghana at independence.  

The Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition did suffer electorally. In fact, at one point, when we were abysmally down, S.D. Dombo gave us a lifelime by allowing Busia to become Opposition Leader though he (Dombo) had won more seats through the Northern People’s Party (NPP),

Propaganda

The pre-independence politics was politics of lies in many ways. In a typical example, lies were spread that the Leaders of our tradition did not want independence. They had coined the expression “shortest possible time” to deceive the people and Nkrumah would bring self government “now”! the CPP manufactured the lie that J.B. Danquah had connived with the British to dvert the attention of the youth from politics to sports; and that is why Danquah had conspired to bring Sydney Abraham from UK to promote sports in Ghana.

These and other lies became the backbone of the CPP propaganda machine. Propaganda in politics means the manipulation and application of falsehood to look like truth for political advantage. This method was applied by the NDC to win election 2008. This was in addition to other false methods employed. Suffice to mention the Fiifi Kwetey’s allegation that President Kufuor had stolen all the gold from Bank of Ghana. They also circulated supposed monies held in Prudential Bank by NPP Ministers which totaled more than the reserves held in the Bank of Ghana. Sad to recount, people believed them.

What do we do about propaganda? As early as 1954, our progenitors had a debate on whether to have a Propaganda Secretary as the CPP. They firmly decided on the purity of Ghanaian politics. They affirmed that we should remain clean and as the people got enlightened we will always remain their party of preference.

No wonder Nana Akufo-Addo wants free education and some people who have benefited from free education do not want it. But truth and goodness will prevail.

Lessons

The 1969 Elections saw a revival of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition. Ghana would never have been where it is now but for the baseless and reckless Acheampong coup.

The 1979 Elections where we lost to the Nkrumalist Party led by Dr. Hilla Limann taught the Danquah-Busia-Dombo Tradition a bitter lesson- “United We Stand; Divide We Fall.” Some of our leaders formed the United National Convention (UNC) led by William Ofori-Atta (Paa Willie). This divided our votes, and the People’s National Party (PNP) went through with far less votes than that of PFP and UNC put together.

I believe we have learnt our lessons and those who forget themselves and pursue divisive agendas should be well advised as we celebrate our tradition.

Notably, in 1992 when Ghana was returning to party politics, a number of the members of the Movement for Freedom and Justice (MFJ) who were from the CPP and other traditions wanted that Prof. Adu Boahen should lead a broad coalition to fight Rawlings. Adu Boahen, then the most popular opposition politician refused to do anything that would break the Danquah-Busia-Dombo front. He told them all: “now the party is over; let everybody go home.”

Prof said to me: “The mistake of 1979 should never be repeated. We should organize and compete from the UGCC perspective”. I respected him for this and learnt from him.

The 1992 Election

This was the election in which the verdict was stolen. Indeed, it was broad daylight robbery. The total circumstances did not allow us to go to Court then. But we wrote our monumental book and we demanded electoral reforms as a pre-condition for taking part in any future elections. We boycotted the Parliamentary Elections that followed.

If we had allowed ourselves to be led as sheep to the slaughter without reforms, we could never have won a nation-wide Presidential election. We could win very few strongholds and be cheated throughout Ghana. The fraud of 1992 included the following:

i)    There were no ID cards and before a registered voter got to the station, a procured voter had voted in his/her name already. No protestation could change the situation.

ii)    The ballot boxes were wooden. No one inspected them before polls began.

iii)    Thumprinted ballot boxes were found in many places and homes on election Day and reported to the police.

iv)    Pre-programming of results.

v)    Arrest of NPP executives and polling agents.

vi)    Votes were not counted on the spot but conveyed to centers and counted under PNDC control.

vii)    Commandoes and cadres were fully in control of the process and intimidation was galore.

viii)    Cadres, Soldiers et al, directed people how to vote.

ix)    Our people were beaten and injured and they fled for their lives.

x)    There was over-voting galore. Indeed, the PNDC could stuff in votes as they pleased.

xi)    Many places were no-go areas for the NPP. Ballot boxes were placed down; people danced around them and voted as they pleased.

xii)    There was plenty evidence of multiple voting and non-signature of the Results Forms.

xiii)    INEC itself, most members of which came from PNDC background was heavily compromised.

Certain consequences flowed from above which resulted of the wisdom of our leaders.The Stolen Verdict was written and donors were engaged. This resulted in electoral reforms which included the following:

•    Voter ID cards which later came to include black and white photos and later on, coloured photos.

•    Transparent ballot boxes.

•    Poling agents who would stand close to the voting area not seated somewhere at the periphery.

•    Votes to be counted at polling stations and announced on the spot.

•    Votes were not to be carried to the collation centres before polling station results announced.

•    Collation centres were only to put together what had been announced at the polling stations in the presence of voters, and then the totals announced as per the documented on recorded votes. This was the beginning of the system which have graduated into pink sheets of today.

These and other reforms came from the demands and protestation of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition.

The second main devise employed by leadership became known as “Opposition Outside Parliament”. Our brilliant men and women were put in committees akin to what exists in Parliament. They analysed issues; they debated issues; a very matter presented in Parliament was replied in terms of the NPP alternative and the public saw our alternatives as better and more cogent. The popularity of the party soared.

Third, the 1992 Constitution itself was tested in the Courts and the law was employed to enhance the horizons of human rights, liberty and the Rule of Law. Nana Addo-Dankwa Akufo-Addo was a shining star in the process. Peter Ala Adjetey gathered some of us around him. Prof. Adu Boahen was the “essential plaintiff” in many cases because even though our cases were in the name of the Party, he was the driving force who insisted on processes being filed and pursued. B.J. da Rocha and Odoi Sykes gave very good guidance.

In all theses, the show boy was Akufo-Addo. Among others, the 31 December holiday and its celebration was cancelled by the Supreme Court. The rights to demonstrate was affirmed and protestations against the regime, unprecedented in the political history of Ghana were witnessed. The Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition had won a sweet victory by constitutional means.

We must note that the elections of 1979 took place because General Afrifa, Adu Boahen, Nana Akufo-Addo and others of our tradition teamed up with other lovers of freedom under the People’s Movement for Freedom and Justice (PMFJ) to fight the military rule of Acheampong.

The 2012 Election and After  

Three main developments should be recounted:

i)    The deepening of internal party democracy

ii)    Biometric registration and biometric verification

iii)    The Supreme Court Case

Internal Party democracy

The 1992 Constitution of Ghana requires that political parties should adhere to democratic principles in their internal organization. It also means that the process should be devoid of corrupt practices including vote buying. It shall also be open to the youth and women etc. In the Congress before the 2004 elections, certain complaints arose about lack of transparency in some quarters etc. The party decided to enlarge the selection process.

Internal party democracy requires that candidates should not be hand-picked or chosen by proclamations such as the infamous Swedru declaration.  The level of participation in such choices should be as broad as possible to satisfy the democratic maxim: quod omnes tangit ab omnibus approbetur – what concerns all must be approved by all.

The NPP National Delegates Conference held on 22 August 2009 opened new frontiers for internal party democracy in Ghana and Africa.  It paved the way for the expansion of the Electoral College for the selection of the NPP’s presidential candidate from about 2,340 delegates to 115,000 delegates.  This provision was successfully implemented in July 2010.

It was the single most radical expansion in internal party democracy in terms of participation in the selection of leaders.  It was a 4,700 percentage rise in the number of delegates.  Assuming that every person who voted for the NPP presidential candidate had the chance of voting for the party’s flagbearer in the 2008 presidential elections had the chance of choosing who the next flagbearer would be, then one out of every 40 people had the vote.

 

This new development was a giant step in deepening internal party democracy.  First, broader participation is itself a basic democratic principle.  Second, it brings the selection process to the doorsteps of the people.  Third, we no longer have to make long trips to one point to choose a flagbearer.  These trips are costly and they impose several journey hazards. Fourth, the influence of money on a few delegates, which have troubled the Congresses of all political parties, is brought to a minimum.  No one can bribe delegates beyond a certain point. Fifth, since the elections are held in the constituencies, the system helps to reinforce the importance of the constituency and the grassroots generally. Sixth, the large numbers constitute a due recognition for the “footsoldiers” and others who constitute the local workers for the party.  Seventh, it is cheaper as voting is done akin to a constituency meeting.  No hotels etc. are required.

 

The participation of the Youth in the selective processes of our political parties is a democratic issue of great concern.  The NPP success story brought more youth into the fold of decision-makers. The impact of the recent development in the NPP on youth participation in internal party politicking is instructive. 

 

According to Article 14 (b) of the NPP constitution, a “Youth” is a Member who has not attained the age of forty (40) years. A cursory sampling of the more than 114,000 NPP delegates makes interesting reading. 

It shows that over 50% of those tasked to elect the 2012 presidential candidate of the NPP were under the age of 40.

The youth of the NPP who form majority of the Polling Station workers in the party have in the over the 18 years existence of the NPP been sidelined in the selection of the party’s flagbearer.

During the 2007 Congress of the NPP only ten (10) percent of youth organizers in the NPP throughout the country had the opportunity to vote since they were not selected by their Chairmen as delegates.  Now they all have the right to vote.  The majority of women organisers, organisers and secretaries are equally youthful due to the expansion.  This is a rejuvenative infusion that augurs well for political participation and internal democracy.

 

In the same vein, the expansion opened a wide avenue for women.  All women organisers are automatic delegates and they have additional votes as chairpersons, organisers, secretaries and youth organisers.

Biometric Registration and Biometric Verification

After the 2008 elections, the NPP had very good grounds to suspect foul play. Our candidate conceded defeat, nevertheless, most graciously. Behind the scenes, various forms of analysis nevertheless commenced leading to the systematic demand for biometric registration and verification. Persistent demands culminated in various fora in which several leading members participated.

The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) and the Danquah Institute led by Gabby Otchere Darko featured prominently. Views were sought globally. The author delivered papers at the Danquah Institute, IEA etc. whereas the EC came to accept biometric registration, it fiercely resisted biometric verification till it eventually dawned on all that half measures are dangerous and that what is biometrically registered should be biometrically verified to have full effect, avoid impersonation etc and sanitise the system.

Once more the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition had led in search for true democracy and good governance.

The Supreme Court Case

Following the flawed elections of 2012, the Presidential Candidate of the NPP, his Vice Presidential Candidate and the Chairman of the Party went to the Supreme Court under the 1992 Constitution. The essence of their claim was that there was over-voting, voting without biometric verification, non-signature of presiding officers, duplicate sheets and pink sheets with same numbering. They pointed out that Nana Akufo-Addo should have been validly declared president on December 9, 2012 because he obtained 56.85% of the votes while President Mahama had 41.79%.

The issues settled for trial were simply as follows:

i)    Whether there were any Constitutional and legal violations, irregularities, malpractices etc during the elections;

ii)    If there were, whether they affected the elections.

We await the verdict of the Supreme Court before any futher analysis. One thing is certain, however. A Supreme Court Judge pronounced that certainly the electoral terrain will no longer be the same after the verdict, no matter how it goes. Once more, the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition has shown its capacity to dissect the most complicated electoral intrigues and help the deepening of democracy in Ghana.

The Immediate Post-Election Future

If God should favourably smile on the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition, our candidate Nana Addo-Dankwa Akufo-Addo will quickly, effectively and honestly, continue with the good works of President Kufour.

Nana Akufo-Addo has a clear well-chalked programme for the socio-economic transformation of Ghana to take our dear nation to the next level. He is convinced that by the prudent management of the economy under his watch, by the avoidance of waste, appropriate prioritisation of our goals, by eschewing corruption, his vision of free SHS education for all Ghanaians will be achieved. We shall soon see an era dubbed: Oil Money for Free Education for all Ghanaians!

The Northern Development authority will be a reality to transform Northern Ghana and the Savannah. When the take-off arrives, Ghanaians will have a good opportunity to know who the real friends of the North are as compared with recent guinea fowl projects which are merely an instrument for fraud.

Unless the economy is transformed and oil money applied to create business, wealth  and deepen the volatile middle income status, prosperity will elude us. The Tema Oil Refinery will instantly receive a new lease of life and save us from rocketing fuel prices and all attendant scarcities. The 22 mini-dams that have been researched on will be given priority for local energy and local irrigation, among others.

The Special Oil Fund will receive public scrutiny and priorities re-defined. With transparency and accountability, create, loot and share will be a thing of the past.

The future is bright.

Conclusion

In this presentation, we have looked at the significance of the Danquah-Busia-Bombo Tradition in past and contemporary Ghanaian politics.

When Prof Adu Boahen spoke against dictatorship at the British Council Hall in 1988, he echoed the cry of our founders and broke the Culture of Silence. This writer who accompanied Prof Adu Boahen, his dear wife Mary and their driver to the British Council Hall at great risk to life and limb, recollects the resounding echo: “onipa nnye aboa” (human beings are not animals) and “ti koro nko agyina” (one head cannot consult with itself, meaning you need the minds of the many to rule a nation). He belonged to the Danquah-Busia-Bombo tradition. But he broke culture of silence for all Ghanaians.

This cry will continue to resonate in Ghana, whenever autocracy, greed and cheating rear their ugly heads. And whenever the NPP cries Development in Freedom we resound the innate catalyst which releases the best attributes of humankind for development.

Ghana’s post-1992 constitutional order is a tribute to our founding fathers. When we read even the provision for a Vice President, we should remember that Kwame Nkrumah deliberately omitted a Vice President in the 1960 Constitution. When we recount that the legislative power of State is vested in only Parliament, we should also remember that the 1960 Constitution allowed Nkrumah to suspend Parliament and rule by Presidential fiat whenever he (Nkrumah) alone felt it was in the national interest (Article 55). Today, Parliament cannot legislate to bring one-party state, introduce, PDA or withdraw our liberties. The Akufo Addo 1969 Constitution brought this to Ghana. Indeed, all the human rights provisions of 1992 Constitution were borrowed from 1969 and the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition should be proud of themselves.

When Ghanaians read with sweet assurance that they have a legal right to demonstrate, we should not be oblivious that this is the result of the struggles of our tradition.

Thank you.

Prof M.A. Ocquaye