A reply to Prof. Prempeh

Read Article

Comments (39)

This article is closed for comments.

Read Comments Comments (39)

kk 12 years ago

Great commentary, well researched article keep it up Bro. The prof goofed.

Great commentary, well researched article keep it up Bro. The prof goofed.
OZA 12 years ago

Sir, you are simply too good a lawyer. This is the first time a learned person has explained his opinion so clearly on this forum without confusing us with those unnecessary (show off) BIG words and chains of adjectives. I ho ...
read full comment

Sir, you are simply too good a lawyer. This is the first time a learned person has explained his opinion so clearly on this forum without confusing us with those unnecessary (show off) BIG words and chains of adjectives. I hope Mr. Okuampa and Price will read your style. Thanks. That is very good!
C.Y. ANDY-K 12 years ago

I think I have said in few words what HKP had said in very many words in his response to this critique.

Simple Man,

Yours is a brilliant contribution on the evolution of fundamental rights, and I wish many readers read ...
read full comment

I think I have said in few words what HKP had said in very many words in his response to this critique.

Simple Man,

Yours is a brilliant contribution on the evolution of fundamental rights, and I wish many readers read it.

You are absolutely right in your lucid exposition but I guess, you, like most, has missed the essence of HKP's jab at the literal imposition of God into the Ghanaian electoral/ political space. I am sure HKP is equally aware of what you have written but still wrote what he did.

Look, on the Ghanaian scene, people are not only invoking god as a metaphor or synonym to, say, e.g., fundamental or natural [rights]. They literally believe in a supreme being directly intervening to make them win elections, and in this case, the source of those inalienable rights like voting. They are therefore thinking and acting in Middle Age terms! That's what HKP was jabbing at, with tongue in cheek, when he remarked that he hoped He (God) did not appear in the summation of the justices of the SC too.

Let us limit ourselves to modern, post-Enlightenment nomenclature, and not Middle Age terminology and beliefs and those of us who are modernists and obdurant pagans in its original sense of non-believers shall leave the superstitious believers alone. No god gave anybody any rights whatsoever because no god created human beings and, btw, the universe too! Simple as that!

Period! And let me add, case closed! Anything else is just like behaving as the savants in Gulliver's Travels!

Andy-K
holy smoke 12 years ago

This was I expect from well meaning and educated Ghanaians. To argue the point without insults. This what happens in civilized societies. The Prof can then reply and we all learn something.

This was I expect from well meaning and educated Ghanaians. To argue the point without insults. This what happens in civilized societies. The Prof can then reply and we all learn something.
Seko 12 years ago

If so why were some Ghanains denied the right to vote becuase the BVM could not pick their finger prints? We also do not need CI 74 or any other regulations to govern the elections. the only think needed then is the prove of ...
read full comment

If so why were some Ghanains denied the right to vote becuase the BVM could not pick their finger prints? We also do not need CI 74 or any other regulations to govern the elections. the only think needed then is the prove of being a Ghanaian.
van-london 12 years ago

Good job. Well done!

Good job. Well done!
Ken 12 years ago

Justice Sai, how can something be natural and unnatural at the same time? If the right to vote is God given right, then why do we bother to register before we can vote? God given right is given to any human being including on ...
read full comment

Justice Sai, how can something be natural and unnatural at the same time? If the right to vote is God given right, then why do we bother to register before we can vote? God given right is given to any human being including one day old child so why do we allow only those 18 years and above to vote?
Bernard 12 years ago

Ken, please do you also know that it is God given right for every human being to have/enjoy sex but do you allow your one year old child to have sex? Kwasiaaa analogy from you Ken. Hahahaaa.

Ken, please do you also know that it is God given right for every human being to have/enjoy sex but do you allow your one year old child to have sex? Kwasiaaa analogy from you Ken. Hahahaaa.
Sumanguru Kante 12 years ago

There is a difference having a right and not being able to exercise it; the fact that children are not able to have sex because they are not allowed to or because they are not in the state to do so, does not mean that the rig ...
read full comment

There is a difference having a right and not being able to exercise it; the fact that children are not able to have sex because they are not allowed to or because they are not in the state to do so, does not mean that the right to sexual intercourse(assuming it is what you claim) is not a a God-given right. In other words, children and unlike 'voters' come into the world with the right to have sex.
Okonko Palm 12 years ago

These are arguments about jurisprudence transposed into the political arena for political expedience.The old arguments about the values of natural law and positive law is being twisted as if the on going debate is now settled ...
read full comment

These are arguments about jurisprudence transposed into the political arena for political expedience.The old arguments about the values of natural law and positive law is being twisted as if the on going debate is now settled in favor of positive law.

Natural law is a theory that posits the existence of a law whose content is set by nature and that therefore has validity everywhere. On the other hand, positive law or legal positivism is a school of thought in philosophy of law and jurisprudence which posits that that there is no inherent or necessary connection between the validity conditions of law and ethics or morality.

In effect natural law believes that for a law to be right it must have a moral basis based on natural law whilst the positivists or positive school of thought believes that morality must have nothing to do with law.

It is this on going debate which is being played out as if the debate is now settled. If anything at all the evidence contradict the professors assertions.All the human right laws have their basis from natural law and is what has informed part of our constitution.

The line drawn in this contest in simplistic terms is a battle between the right wings who are mainly positivists and the left who are mainly for natural law.For example the npp with its right wing agenda have lawyers who are mainly from the positivist school of thought and the ndc based on social justice have lawyers mainly from the natural law school of thought.So it is not surprising where this professor is coming from.

There are lawyers and judges who subscribe to these legal philosophies which inform their perception on law.So this law lecturer must only be echoing his values and is wrong to make a judgment on the issue of jurisprudence on Lawyer Lithur's values and fine legal jurisprudence.

Kwame 12 years ago

Is fundamental not God given ! H Prempeh is right

Is fundamental not God given ! H Prempeh is right
God is great 12 years ago

They have the right to vote but the have to come to Ghana. Prof. is wrong

They have the right to vote but the have to come to Ghana. Prof. is wrong
Paul Amuna 12 years ago

This is matter of commonsense. Our leaders, parties, governments do not represent God, neither is our governance designed based on a 'godly' instrument and instruction. Constitutions are human and meant to guide the way we r ...
read full comment

This is matter of commonsense. Our leaders, parties, governments do not represent God, neither is our governance designed based on a 'godly' instrument and instruction. Constitutions are human and meant to guide the way we rule ourselves.

The right to vote is constitutional, no doubt about that. It is however not an 'order' from God, nor is it a 'right given by God'. What is so difficult about this?

Counsel Lithur in his eagerness to buttress his point about the constitutionality and 'rightness' of Universal franchise, simply made a mistake by adding "God" to it. Accept that he was wrong and let's move on.

I just fundamentally disagree with this silly philosophy of 'defending the indefencible'. Even Tony Lithur himself upon reflection, would agree that his statement about "God" was WRONG. Let' stop kidding and be truthful and sensible OK?
David Atugiya 12 years ago

Paul, for once I beg to disagree with you. Tony Lihtur as briliantly argued by Justice in this write up was right, when in his address to the Supreme Court on Wednesday he asserted that the right to vote in Ghana is “fundam ...
read full comment

Paul, for once I beg to disagree with you. Tony Lihtur as briliantly argued by Justice in this write up was right, when in his address to the Supreme Court on Wednesday he asserted that the right to vote in Ghana is “fundamental”, “inalienable” and “God-given. Yes, the right to vote is a constitutional matter just as the right to live. As Justice in his piece explained, the right to vote has over time entrenched in most constitutions of most if not all nations as a fundamental one. So once a right to something is fundamental one is not neccessarily wrong to say that, that right is a birth right. So if the right to vote is a birth right then that right is Godly. So I cannot see what is the silly philosophy of "defending the indefencible" as suggested by you.
Musa 12 years ago

Kindegarten kids dont vote abi. If God given, they should. All God given rights are not limited in any way until you cause wahala.

Kindegarten kids dont vote abi. If God given, they should. All God given rights are not limited in any way until you cause wahala.
Paul Amuna 12 years ago

But David, let's be real here. Is it GOD who gives the right to vote? The voting process is a human institution, not a decree by God. If voting was such a God-given right, why did it require a lot of fighting and deaths of pe ...
read full comment

But David, let's be real here. Is it GOD who gives the right to vote? The voting process is a human institution, not a decree by God. If voting was such a God-given right, why did it require a lot of fighting and deaths of people e.g. the suffragettes (fighting for women to vote), blacks and other minorities in America etc. to "get the vote'?

The rest of Tony Lithur's address was fine, except his inclusion of the words "gid-given right".

Voting is clearly a human rights issue and I am sure you will agree with me that it is not in all countries that people have the right to vote. In the US for instance, NOT ALL RESIDENTS ARE ALLOWED TO VOTE (unlike the UK where MOST people living in a borough once they are registered on the electoral register, can vote.

Because it is a constitutional provision, some have even argued that it is against the law not to cast your vote, but we who believe in civil liberties are the same people to argue against people being 'punished' for not voting e.g. in Australia where it is an important civic duty.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree, but
Okonko Palm 12 years ago

I think Dr Amunia is giving the emphasis by Tony Lithur's semantic "God given right" its literal meaning.In fact is a phrase that has evolved under the human rights acts to mean the same as fundamental Human Rights.Which mean ...
read full comment

I think Dr Amunia is giving the emphasis by Tony Lithur's semantic "God given right" its literal meaning.In fact is a phrase that has evolved under the human rights acts to mean the same as fundamental Human Rights.Which means rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled.At least these are all enshrined under our constitution so we shouldn't allow his emphasis to define his argument.

I understand where Paul is coming from as a scientist he believes in hard facts based on realism
But this professor seems to be making the wrong arguments between left and right political location point scoring.

Lithur's point was that the right to vote as compared to an agents duty to append a signature have two different weights. One is a right and the other a duty and hence the metaphor.

It suits the npp intellectuals to argue that freedom of speech and expression is a fundamental right that you can not derogate from but not the right to vote.Carrying these arguments into jurisprudence to cast doubt on lithurs argument before the court is disingenuous of him.
Paul Amuna 12 years ago

Fair point, but Lithur should have qualified it to avoid this apparent confusion, Okonko. It is that which creates the 'political opportunism' you refer to. My point is, why give your political opponents 'cheap' grounds for a ...
read full comment

Fair point, but Lithur should have qualified it to avoid this apparent confusion, Okonko. It is that which creates the 'political opportunism' you refer to. My point is, why give your political opponents 'cheap' grounds for attacking you?
Nii 12 years ago

Paul don't take "God-given" literally. Consider the use of "Act of God" when a natural disaster strikes. Justice is right.

Paul don't take "God-given" literally. Consider the use of "Act of God" when a natural disaster strikes. Justice is right.
Paul Amuna 12 years ago

I will go along with that explanation, but some people are arguing as if it is a 'decree' of God, when in fact it is not.

I will go along with that explanation, but some people are arguing as if it is a 'decree' of God, when in fact it is not.

Okonko Palm 12 years ago

Hi Paul,
Sorry for misspelling your name and thanks for acknowledgement.

Hi Paul,
Sorry for misspelling your name and thanks for acknowledgement.
Frank Appiah 12 years ago

The United states Law professor Kwasi Prempeh should do more research before making public utterances.

The United states Law professor Kwasi Prempeh should do more research before making public utterances.
Akwamuni 12 years ago

Paul I am with you on this one. Excellent essay from Srem-Sai though but as you said we have to raise the "offside" flag on this because it does not pass the commonsense test. We need to raise the standard of discurse a bit. ...
read full comment

Paul I am with you on this one. Excellent essay from Srem-Sai though but as you said we have to raise the "offside" flag on this because it does not pass the commonsense test. We need to raise the standard of discurse a bit. Good show.
G. K. Berko 12 years ago

I wish I had seen and read your piece before posting on the topic. Your argument is better updated version of my opinion. You went way beyond the popular notion to tap in the most modern precedents and legal substantiation. ...
read full comment

I wish I had seen and read your piece before posting on the topic. Your argument is better updated version of my opinion. You went way beyond the popular notion to tap in the most modern precedents and legal substantiation. Great job!

Since both you and Prof. Prempeh are in the Legal profession, I think the rest of us could remain spectators for now and encourage you to sort things out to settle it all for us.

Thanks a million!!

Long live Ghana!!!
K.Poku 12 years ago

The so called 241,000 plus voters who according to EC comprised of Ghanaians working for international organizations, students under government scholarship and others didn't come to Ghana to register. EC supposedly went to wh ...
read full comment

The so called 241,000 plus voters who according to EC comprised of Ghanaians working for international organizations, students under government scholarship and others didn't come to Ghana to register. EC supposedly went to wherever they were to register and to vote. so in essence all Ghanaians living in abroad should be accorded the same right. There is clearly a different between "fundamental right" and "God given right". The Prof is right.
I am the one this writer referenced in his article about assertion that if voting is "God given right" then there is no need to register to vote. He disagrees with me but I am surprised that Mr. Sai doesn't see any difference between fundamental rights and God given rights because there clearly is a difference. Fundamental human right is a subset of God given right but not the other way around.
Akora Oteng 12 years ago

Do not make unnecessary arguments.You did not make any sense here. Now the EC was given a lot of money to acquire all that they demanded to make our Democracy move forward and better. How did he not decide to train the much n ...
read full comment

Do not make unnecessary arguments.You did not make any sense here. Now the EC was given a lot of money to acquire all that they demanded to make our Democracy move forward and better. How did he not decide to train the much needed personell to man the machines.EC admits there were ovevoting, irregularities,etc.,etc., How can that be?Since it is human to make mistakes and it is Afari Gyan's humanrite, so I ask, when is eIfnough mistakes enough to be tolerated so we can correct ourselves and move ahead. UNLIMITED, too? If stealing and cheating are NOT vices but rights,then why do we vote and also have police and law enforcement agencies?
NANA HAKIM 12 years ago

Hello Mr. & Mrs. Ghana & Justice,

THIS IS A CRISP AND BRLLIANT PIECE for public consumption.

Justice, you're, indeed, a bright lawyer who personifies academic brilliance! I WISH YOU MORE THAN YOU NEED IN HEALTH AND WIS ...
read full comment

Hello Mr. & Mrs. Ghana & Justice,

THIS IS A CRISP AND BRLLIANT PIECE for public consumption.

Justice, you're, indeed, a bright lawyer who personifies academic brilliance! I WISH YOU MORE THAN YOU NEED IN HEALTH AND WISDOM TO PUSH YOU AHEAD!

LONG LIVE AFRICA! GOD BLESS GHANA!! FORWARD EVER!!!

Nana Hakim, RSW, is a practising Social Worker in AARHUS, Denmark. He received his Social Work in Ghana, Germany & Canada.
Tutui 12 years ago

I am not a lawyer so bear with me. The right to life and speech are God given. It is not controlled by any law. You can say anything you want to say so far as it does not do any harm to another person. However when you have d ...
read full comment

I am not a lawyer so bear with me. The right to life and speech are God given. It is not controlled by any law. You can say anything you want to say so far as it does not do any harm to another person. However when you have defined voting age and who and who cannot vote, I do not think they are the same. A Nigerian or Togolese can come to Ghana and comment on our politics. Right? What about voting? Man made and God made are not the same please. Please find another way to explain this. Freedom, liberty and pursuit of happiness are God given and no man is supposed to curtail that until you do something to that affects someone.
Dada 12 years ago

What Law do you practice in UK? Is it not immigration law and the arrangement of fake marriages?

What Law do you practice in UK? Is it not immigration law and the arrangement of fake marriages?
Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law 12 years ago

It takes a dangerous leap of faith for the author to suggest that Prof. Prempeh's statement,“the right to vote is, in Ghana as everywhere else, a right that emanates from "positive law" could necessarily imply the contrapos ...
read full comment

It takes a dangerous leap of faith for the author to suggest that Prof. Prempeh's statement,“the right to vote is, in Ghana as everywhere else, a right that emanates from "positive law" could necessarily imply the contrapositive that," a law cannot be both “fundamental” and “positive” at the same time. In other words, a law cannot be “god-given” and “man-made” at the same time." This meaning imposed by the author is way off the mark. Prof. Prempeh implies no such flawed contrapositive, and the author, being a lawyer, should have taken care not to put such meaning on Prof. Prempeh's assertion in order to debate it.
Having said that, I think it is splitting hairs to debate a collateral issue as to whether the voting right is a fundamental right. It should suffice to state that the right is visceral to a democracy, and thus if Lithur asserts its "god-givenness", those who disagree with him could at least construe it in linguistic parlance as a hyperbole, and give the learned lawyer a pass. In the context of the larger arguments posed by both sides in the on-going election petition, the status of the voting right is completely moot, having the agreed inference of at least a basic right not to be easily toyed with.

K.Poku 12 years ago

Well Prof Prempeh has replied to this article on his facebook and it looks like Sai misunderstood the Prof.and we are waiting for his reply.

Well Prof Prempeh has replied to this article on his facebook and it looks like Sai misunderstood the Prof.and we are waiting for his reply.
Simple Man 12 years ago

Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law .Please all the ink you pour on paper has not help anyone one bit.Your thesis can only be understood with the help of a dictionary.In fact you have not communicated.Have you ever been a teacher? Learn ...
read full comment

Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law .Please all the ink you pour on paper has not help anyone one bit.Your thesis can only be understood with the help of a dictionary.In fact you have not communicated.Have you ever been a teacher? Learn to be simple;for simplicity is beautiful. Thanks
Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law 12 years ago

List three vocabulary items or phrases that you think is too difficult to understand. I think I was very simple in my post!

List three vocabulary items or phrases that you think is too difficult to understand. I think I was very simple in my post!
Kelly 12 years ago

Erudite commentary. You are right on the money. This is what we must use this platform to educate ourselves. I hope Daily Graphic would curl this article for a wider readership.

Erudite commentary. You are right on the money. This is what we must use this platform to educate ourselves. I hope Daily Graphic would curl this article for a wider readership.
CHEMICAL ALI 12 years ago

And not the charlatan who prides in knowing the law.

And not the charlatan who prides in knowing the law.
ATO 12 years ago

THIS IS CERTAINLY ONE OF THE VERY BEST ARTICLES I HAVE READ HERE AT THIS SITE.

THIS IS CERTAINLY ONE OF THE VERY BEST ARTICLES I HAVE READ HERE AT THIS SITE.
seidu 12 years ago

great insight lawyer these so called professors of law are so opionated and bais in political colour that they keep fooling we the laymen.I hope prof. prempeh will know that interpretation of the law is fundamental to the pro ...
read full comment

great insight lawyer these so called professors of law are so opionated and bais in political colour that they keep fooling we the laymen.I hope prof. prempeh will know that interpretation of the law is fundamental to the provisions provided not his opion.
WARD GDX - WE THE PEOPLE 12 years ago

You are missing the point.

No did the Prof assert that A law cannot be both God given and man made.

He specifically stated THE VOTING RIGHT is not a God given right.

Voting right is not God given right.

Voting R ...
read full comment

You are missing the point.

No did the Prof assert that A law cannot be both God given and man made.

He specifically stated THE VOTING RIGHT is not a God given right.

Voting right is not God given right.

Voting Right is fundamentally a concomitant feature of Democratic and its variant forms of Government.

Democratic governance is not God given gov't.

As I argued somewhere, if Voting Right is God given, your infant child or any toddler should be able to go and vote on any election day. Or voting should not be encumbered by any preconditions such as showing ID, verification, age stipulation etc

RIGHT TO LIFE is an example of God given right.
crorkz 11 years ago

nVa9gB Really enjoyed this blog.Really thank you! Great.

nVa9gB Really enjoyed this blog.Really thank you! Great.

39 Comments

Welcome,

SIGN IN

Welcome,

RESET PASSWORD

Hello,

Terms and conditions

REGISTER

A reply to Prof. Prempeh

Read Comments .st0{display:none;fill:#14BDD3;} .st1{display:none;} .st2{display:inline;fill:#FC0F0F;} .st3{display:inline;fill:#FFFFFF;} .st4{display:inline;fill:none;stroke:#000000;stroke-width:6;stroke-miterlimit:10;} Comments (39)

Read Comments Comments (39)