I raised serious questions about the justification of setting up the Commission of Inquiry to look into the Ghana@50 celebrations in a previous article-`Case for halting the `Ghana@50 Celebrations’ Inquiry-(27/06/09); the respondents, with a few exceptions and largely negative, failed to address the issues. They were either haemorrhaging from party loyalty or displayed an incredibly intolerance for debate (the symbol for true democracy). Some showed their cowardice, when confronted with ideas they couldn’t counter with abuse and juvenile tantrum. Let me remind those people in the latter category, that the norm in a democracy is exchanging ideas in a civilised manner regardless of the differences in opinion.
I am reproducing some of the notable exceptions, who made a serious attempt to debate the issues to give a taste to those bereft of ideas. Hopefully this will enhance the concept of free speech in a civilised political community and encourage those with serious suggestions about the way we are governed to step forward. Nana Konadu: I would have agreed with you wholeheartedly, Mr Frimpong, if the inquiry were to last a year or more. But it’s only 90days, so I doubt if the inquiry would make a big difference to the current political atmosphere. I have to admit you make a strong case for drawing a line under the corruption investigations. I held a strong opinion that these NPP officials should get their just desserts; but your words of wisdom have weakened my stance. Asante: Nana Konadu referred to 90days as insignificant and I want to remind her/him that a week in politics is like eternity. Hence 90 days will give the ruling party a field day to milk the NPP dry and make nonsense of our democracy. The BNI is investigating this matter, so why on earth, should another body be set up to look into the same matter? Of course, it suits them to have these alleged corruption played in the public gallery for as long as possible to drain the opposition psychologically. The ruling party hopes to reap some electoral success from making their opponents look incompetent. They have clearly stopped counting the cost of duplication of efforts as the Commission and the BNI step on each other’s toes picking the same data from the same source. Meanwhile nobody is worried about the wasteful use of the Nation’s resources in chasing wild goose. How can they turn round and claim the nation’s assets are safe in their hands? The transition team `tea budget’ cost and actual cost are the joke in `Chop Bars’, these guys don’t get it, that they are poor with their sums. You hit the nail on the head, when you mentioned that the problem with corruption in high places will only go away when Ruling Parties are subject to scrutiny, whist in office, to keep them on their toes; we shouldn’t wait for them to leave office before chasing them with dogs to account for their stewardship of the nation’s assets. It is not only crass; it gives the corrupt officials ample time to cover their tracks, so proving them, in a court of law, is 10 times harder! Unless, of course the evidence is manufactured! E.Osei Asibey-Atlanta: Kwaku I can’t agree with you more. The prosecuting of corrupt officials should be done whilst the government is still in power. That is not to say that an official after leaving office could not be called back for questioning. The idea is, if governments really want to do the right thing, they should start with their own people and not the opposition. We need to move forward and stop looking backwards.
Ocla: Who constituted the `National Reconciliation Comm.’? The Nation (rep. by government) is supposed to be above party politics. Why should the Ghana@50 planning committee exceed approved parliamentary vote without reverting to the legislative body? What impudence is that! Do not cry foul; rather let’s see what comes out, for Ghanaians to judge the fairness of events. Long live accountability in Ghana.
Asante: You make a fair point about the parliamentary approval of the funds. But is not the case that BNI has its hands full with investigation on this very issue? So what is the point of having another commission to look into the matter?
Prof. Lungu: Read extract from Article ``...The government should start looking ahead and concentrate on protecting what is left in the National coffers by investing in the economic infrastructure such as Education and Health....’’ If ``The government’’ does not know who, why and how much got away illegally and unethically, how can ``The government...concentrate on protecting what is left in the National coffers by investing in the economic infrastructure such as Education and Health?’’ How can ``the government’’ devise meaningful safeguard going forward?
ITEM: We dare say Mr. Kwaku Frimpong doth protest too much! We dare say Mr. Kwaku Frimpong is impugning the reputations of the persons selected to conduct the investigation, before they have even started. That is not right or useful. We dare say Mr.Kwaku Frimpong has not made a good case.
Asante: You are very quick with your judgement but you gave little thought to the issues raised. Mr Frimpong argues that it makes no sense to shut the gate of a stable after the horse living in that stable has fled. If we are concerned about the safety of such horse, our duty is to ensure we lock the stable door whilst the horse is in the stable.
There is no certainty about getting a conviction for these alleged crimes let alone the retrieval of the monies involved. So for the national interest, it make sense, not to dig into the already depleted funds to conduct further investigation; especially when the BNI is supposed to be looking into these same alleged crime. Do we want to carry on funding events that has no certainty of returns, or abandon them and cut our loss? That is the question! He goes on to argue that Democracy will suffer, because the opposition, whose job it is to hold the government to account will be neutralised as they spent time on the dock instead of taking the government to task on the day to day important issues of the Nation.
You can’t beat such a wonderful presentation of a case! And Mr Frimpong is definitely not a moaner nor does he question the integrity of the panel. He is a patriot, with a vision for a better Ghana. Ghana should be proud to have people like him who take the bull by the horn and criticise constructively. Prof. Lungu: Asante, proverbs are typically never useful as teaching instruments and public enterprises never grow without a look-back. In fact, after a major public event, it standard procedure to take a hard look to see what you did wrong/whatyou did right, etc. Mr kufour and his government neglected to do that. (There are many more ``neglects’’ in this area). Does explain why we are here, doesn’t it? Fact is, you will never know when/how to close the barn door from which your horses have left without a look-back. You will never know if the horses left on their own or someone opened the door and allowed the horses to vacate the house. (Maybe the horse was carted away in BMWs).
ITEM: It makes us wonder why you are so sure there is `` no certainty of returns’’. Civilized societies in democracies do not only prosecute cases that have certainty of ``getting a conviction for these alleged crimes let alone the retrieval of the monies involved’’. What are prisons for? What are punishments for? After all, those ``senior officials’’ could turn out to be petty criminals. Kofi Boye: A very good conciliatory article. I hope the politicians learn from it. The most important point made is that, if the BNI was streamlined then they act on any complaints straightaway and not wait for governments to leave office before they are investigated.
Rawliings has shouted from day one that NPP Ministers should be jailed. With his comments, he has already found them guilty without any trial. Most NDC supporters take their cue from him. Now with the allegations from Nigeria (about him) I hope he learns that rumour/allegations are not necessarily always true. Will the government institute similar Commission to investigate allegations that Nigerians provided millions for the NDC campaign, or they will leave it for a future NPP government to investigate? This is our stupidity by going round in circles. It is undeniable fact that NDC supporters want NPP Ministers jailed- if anything at all, just for the sin of being NPP members. On the other hand, NPP supporters do not see any need for a Commission. Let me say that, I don’t care which party is in power; but no Minister (whether NDC or NPP) is completely devoid of corruption or some sort of thievery. Show me a Minister who is not corrupt and I will show you someone who has not been involved in frontline politics!! We only see the misbehaviour of the other side and not our own. I don’t envy the commission because their report will be heavily scrutinized. They must have the thickest of skins to accept the eventual and hurtful criticism about themselves and their families. Every skeleton in their closets would be hung out. It may be unfair but that is the nature of the game. Gone are the days when a government commission report was read by a small percentage of lawyers. My advice to them is that we will all read their report with eagle eyes. WATCH THIS SPACE!!!!!!
NPP UNITY STRATEGIC DIRECTION: 1. Economic benefits continue to be enormous. (2) NDC political elites must not ruin the benefits by picking on tiny aspects of an administrative error or a tiny minority of individuals found to be dishonest. NDC party elites are not angels, e.g. Muntaka, Ayiraga, Bagbin, Ahwoi, etc. They’ve been dishonest. Even JJ Rawlings is now the richest man in Ghana and Africa. Therefore diverting attention to other matters, which will, without doubt, discredit the achievement of the mass or majority of fellow Ghanaians who worked hard to achieve such international fame; it will ruin their efforts to gain political points or purpose and its, indeed, disgraceful. Look, in the UK, Buckingham Palace and Parliament Buildings were constructed when the ordinary man in the street had less to eat or cloth. Now in Ghana, cost of anything done that is of historical importance is calculated by half-baked, illiterate contributors of Ghanaweb, as a waste of money. Yet these same people do not condemn the construction of Ghana Parliament, Flag Staff House, Aburi Rest House, including State House where JJ Rawlings mum worked as Catering Officer; it provided employment for her, a single mother, to look after her promising child, JJ Rawlings. Now, because JJ Rawlings had or has nothing to show off, the current Presidential Palace Building is enviously judged as a waste of state revenue. How? Because JJ Rawlings should be the prime mover, if not, then it is against the interest of the poor masses. He is now an extremely rich man, with interests and influence in Nigeria, in the good company of the late Obacha and now the River state Governor. Please don’t ruin the economic and social benefits of the Ghana@50 by your political witch hunts because of Rawlings and associates money laundering activities and possible investigations. Don’t ruin Ghana’s image because of Muntaka Mubarack, Ayiraga, Bagbin and Ahwoi’s dishonesty and cover-ups. May God bless Ghana our motherland!
Kofi Nkrumah: Kwaku Frimpong, you stated so many good reasons why the current government of Ghana should put an end to the ``Ghana@50 Inquiry’’, but there are only two reasons amongst many, which score far more marks than the numerous ones you brought up, which make it necessary for the Inquiry to proceed. The first reason is that it is the constitutional responsibility of the government in power to address all issues of financial malfeasance which might have occurred during the reign of its predecessor, and to ensure that anyone implicated is handed over to the judiciary to deal with. The second reason is that the Inquiry is a necessary democratic procedure that helps to avoid the undemocratic system of just senselessly rounding up suspects, so that when it finally becomes established beyond reasonable doubt that someone is implicated, it will not look a case of witch-hunting. It’s, therefore, important that the people are made to understand that in spite of the cost to be incurred, we need to establish facts, for the law to take its course; to help ensure that our democracy guarantees equality before the law in practical terms; instead of a democracy that only shouts ``Rule of Law’’. I don’t want someone to tell me that because the farm-labourer stole only a chicken, the value of the stolen item must justify his trial in the smallest court of law, where only lay magistrates and a few staff carry out the prosecution. Just compare the total daily salaries of the police, the magistrate and the court staff to the value of the chicken, not to mention the time wasted by the police in taking statements before the thief is charged. If you think, the chicken stolen is spilt milk, then, I’m sorry you’ve got it all wrong. The stealing of the chicken is a crime and must be dealt with accordingly irrespective of whether it was stolen by farm labourer, or teacher. We are sick and tired of people using complex language to dismiss crime as spilt milk to set free dishonest ministers and state officials who have little sympathy for the poverty-stricken masses, when even foreigners are endeavouring to bring in resources to help get rid of malaria as it continues to cause frequent mortality, especially among children; Isn’t it a big SHAME? Okyeame: It’s all about the executive branch of the government interfering in the judiciary branch which shouldn’t happen in a democracy, period; and that is all Mr Frimpong is trying to let us understand.
Kwabena Yeboah: The article carries two main themes: (a) political witch hunt and (b) the purpose and usefulness of the commission. If it is true that Frimpong was drawing readers’ attention to the executive interference of the judiciary, then he does not understand the functions of these two democratic institutions. I saw nothing of the sort, so there is no conflict there. Mr Frimpong asserts in his article that there is no benefit to national interest in pursuing the enquiry. He makes the case to justify the over $50 million blow out, by employing cost/benefit analysis. According to him, since we cannot measure the joy and the feel-good factor that the celebration brought, the cost was justified. This is a bunch of ``huey’’.
CONCLUSION
It must be apparent to the reader that the most serious contributors to the debate were those with positive response to the article, in particular Mr Asante, who seem to be on the same wavelength with me on the issues. He paraphrased, as shown below, the questions I raised about the Inquiry Commission, in his eloquent manner, as he got frustrated about the lack of proper alternative response to my views in the article. I am taking this opportunity to invite, once again, those with alternative views to answer the questions, in particular the central question about two different bodies conducting the same investigations and the cost justification, with greater sophistication.
Asante: Those holding opposing views to mine, with few exceptions like Kofi Nkrumah, seem to have little tolerance for adult debate and frankly it’s a waste of time engaging you in any productive discourse. You are impervious to reasoning because of party loyalty haemorrhage. However, I will make one last attempt to distil the salient points from the article and ask for alternative views, not driven by party loyalty, for once.
(1) BNI is already investigating the `Ghana@50Celebrations’, so can someone tell us the justification for setting up another body to perform concurrently the same task? Is it not a waste of National Resource that everyone agrees is very limited?
(2) Is it democratically healthy for the opposition to spend unproductive hours in the dock, when they should be debating national issues and holding the government to account?
(3) Is it not better to be vigilant with our tangible assets and invest them wisely than to exhaust them with the hope of gaining a notional dividend? (4) Is it not true that the removal of the dark cloud over our fragile democracy brought about by the perceived witch hunt, will promote good working relationship between the government and the opposition?
(5) Finally, which of the two scenarios below will stand a better chance of saving life at a clinical theatre?-(1) Keep a watchful eye during surgical operation (2) Take a lax view during surgical operation but ensure constant monitoring after operation.
When these questions are properly addressed, you will begin to appreciate Mr Frimpong as a true patriot and also the concept of free speech in a true democracy.
I raised serious questions about the justification of setting up the Commission of Inquiry to look into the Ghana@50 celebrations in a previous article-`Case for halting the `Ghana@50 Celebrations’ Inquiry-(27/06/09); the respondents, with a few exceptions and largely negative, failed to address the issues. They were either haemorrhaging from party loyalty or displayed an incredibly intolerance for debate (the symbol for true democracy). Some showed their cowardice, when confronted with ideas they couldn’t counter with abuse and juvenile tantrum. Let me remind those people in the latter category, that the norm in a democracy is exchanging ideas in a civilised manner regardless of the differences in opinion.
I am reproducing some of the notable exceptions, who made a serious attempt to debate the issues to give a taste to those bereft of ideas. Hopefully this will enhance the concept of free speech in a civilised political community and encourage those with serious suggestions about the way we are governed to step forward. Nana Konadu: I would have agreed with you wholeheartedly, Mr Frimpong, if the inquiry were to last a year or more. But it’s only 90days, so I doubt if the inquiry would make a big difference to the current political atmosphere. I have to admit you make a strong case for drawing a line under the corruption investigations. I held a strong opinion that these NPP officials should get their just desserts; but your words of wisdom have weakened my stance. Asante: Nana Konadu referred to 90days as insignificant and I want to remind her/him that a week in politics is like eternity. Hence 90 days will give the ruling party a field day to milk the NPP dry and make nonsense of our democracy. The BNI is investigating this matter, so why on earth, should another body be set up to look into the same matter? Of course, it suits them to have these alleged corruption played in the public gallery for as long as possible to drain the opposition psychologically. The ruling party hopes to reap some electoral success from making their opponents look incompetent. They have clearly stopped counting the cost of duplication of efforts as the Commission and the BNI step on each other’s toes picking the same data from the same source. Meanwhile nobody is worried about the wasteful use of the Nation’s resources in chasing wild goose. How can they turn round and claim the nation’s assets are safe in their hands? The transition team `tea budget’ cost and actual cost are the joke in `Chop Bars’, these guys don’t get it, that they are poor with their sums. You hit the nail on the head, when you mentioned that the problem with corruption in high places will only go away when Ruling Parties are subject to scrutiny, whist in office, to keep them on their toes; we shouldn’t wait for them to leave office before chasing them with dogs to account for their stewardship of the nation’s assets. It is not only crass; it gives the corrupt officials ample time to cover their tracks, so proving them, in a court of law, is 10 times harder! Unless, of course the evidence is manufactured! E.Osei Asibey-Atlanta: Kwaku I can’t agree with you more. The prosecuting of corrupt officials should be done whilst the government is still in power. That is not to say that an official after leaving office could not be called back for questioning. The idea is, if governments really want to do the right thing, they should start with their own people and not the opposition. We need to move forward and stop looking backwards.
Ocla: Who constituted the `National Reconciliation Comm.’? The Nation (rep. by government) is supposed to be above party politics. Why should the Ghana@50 planning committee exceed approved parliamentary vote without reverting to the legislative body? What impudence is that! Do not cry foul; rather let’s see what comes out, for Ghanaians to judge the fairness of events. Long live accountability in Ghana.
Asante: You make a fair point about the parliamentary approval of the funds. But is not the case that BNI has its hands full with investigation on this very issue? So what is the point of having another commission to look into the matter?
Prof. Lungu: Read extract from Article ``...The government should start looking ahead and concentrate on protecting what is left in the National coffers by investing in the economic infrastructure such as Education and Health....’’ If ``The government’’ does not know who, why and how much got away illegally and unethically, how can ``The government...concentrate on protecting what is left in the National coffers by investing in the economic infrastructure such as Education and Health?’’ How can ``the government’’ devise meaningful safeguard going forward?
ITEM: We dare say Mr. Kwaku Frimpong doth protest too much! We dare say Mr. Kwaku Frimpong is impugning the reputations of the persons selected to conduct the investigation, before they have even started. That is not right or useful. We dare say Mr.Kwaku Frimpong has not made a good case.
Asante: You are very quick with your judgement but you gave little thought to the issues raised. Mr Frimpong argues that it makes no sense to shut the gate of a stable after the horse living in that stable has fled. If we are concerned about the safety of such horse, our duty is to ensure we lock the stable door whilst the horse is in the stable.
There is no certainty about getting a conviction for these alleged crimes let alone the retrieval of the monies involved. So for the national interest, it make sense, not to dig into the already depleted funds to conduct further investigation; especially when the BNI is supposed to be looking into these same alleged crime. Do we want to carry on funding events that has no certainty of returns, or abandon them and cut our loss? That is the question! He goes on to argue that Democracy will suffer, because the opposition, whose job it is to hold the government to account will be neutralised as they spent time on the dock instead of taking the government to task on the day to day important issues of the Nation.
You can’t beat such a wonderful presentation of a case! And Mr Frimpong is definitely not a moaner nor does he question the integrity of the panel. He is a patriot, with a vision for a better Ghana. Ghana should be proud to have people like him who take the bull by the horn and criticise constructively. Prof. Lungu: Asante, proverbs are typically never useful as teaching instruments and public enterprises never grow without a look-back. In fact, after a major public event, it standard procedure to take a hard look to see what you did wrong/whatyou did right, etc. Mr kufour and his government neglected to do that. (There are many more ``neglects’’ in this area). Does explain why we are here, doesn’t it? Fact is, you will never know when/how to close the barn door from which your horses have left without a look-back. You will never know if the horses left on their own or someone opened the door and allowed the horses to vacate the house. (Maybe the horse was carted away in BMWs).
ITEM: It makes us wonder why you are so sure there is `` no certainty of returns’’. Civilized societies in democracies do not only prosecute cases that have certainty of ``getting a conviction for these alleged crimes let alone the retrieval of the monies involved’’. What are prisons for? What are punishments for? After all, those ``senior officials’’ could turn out to be petty criminals. Kofi Boye: A very good conciliatory article. I hope the politicians learn from it. The most important point made is that, if the BNI was streamlined then they act on any complaints straightaway and not wait for governments to leave office before they are investigated.
Rawliings has shouted from day one that NPP Ministers should be jailed. With his comments, he has already found them guilty without any trial. Most NDC supporters take their cue from him. Now with the allegations from Nigeria (about him) I hope he learns that rumour/allegations are not necessarily always true. Will the government institute similar Commission to investigate allegations that Nigerians provided millions for the NDC campaign, or they will leave it for a future NPP government to investigate? This is our stupidity by going round in circles. It is undeniable fact that NDC supporters want NPP Ministers jailed- if anything at all, just for the sin of being NPP members. On the other hand, NPP supporters do not see any need for a Commission. Let me say that, I don’t care which party is in power; but no Minister (whether NDC or NPP) is completely devoid of corruption or some sort of thievery. Show me a Minister who is not corrupt and I will show you someone who has not been involved in frontline politics!! We only see the misbehaviour of the other side and not our own. I don’t envy the commission because their report will be heavily scrutinized. They must have the thickest of skins to accept the eventual and hurtful criticism about themselves and their families. Every skeleton in their closets would be hung out. It may be unfair but that is the nature of the game. Gone are the days when a government commission report was read by a small percentage of lawyers. My advice to them is that we will all read their report with eagle eyes. WATCH THIS SPACE!!!!!!
NPP UNITY STRATEGIC DIRECTION: 1. Economic benefits continue to be enormous. (2) NDC political elites must not ruin the benefits by picking on tiny aspects of an administrative error or a tiny minority of individuals found to be dishonest. NDC party elites are not angels, e.g. Muntaka, Ayiraga, Bagbin, Ahwoi, etc. They’ve been dishonest. Even JJ Rawlings is now the richest man in Ghana and Africa. Therefore diverting attention to other matters, which will, without doubt, discredit the achievement of the mass or majority of fellow Ghanaians who worked hard to achieve such international fame; it will ruin their efforts to gain political points or purpose and its, indeed, disgraceful. Look, in the UK, Buckingham Palace and Parliament Buildings were constructed when the ordinary man in the street had less to eat or cloth. Now in Ghana, cost of anything done that is of historical importance is calculated by half-baked, illiterate contributors of Ghanaweb, as a waste of money. Yet these same people do not condemn the construction of Ghana Parliament, Flag Staff House, Aburi Rest House, including State House where JJ Rawlings mum worked as Catering Officer; it provided employment for her, a single mother, to look after her promising child, JJ Rawlings. Now, because JJ Rawlings had or has nothing to show off, the current Presidential Palace Building is enviously judged as a waste of state revenue. How? Because JJ Rawlings should be the prime mover, if not, then it is against the interest of the poor masses. He is now an extremely rich man, with interests and influence in Nigeria, in the good company of the late Obacha and now the River state Governor. Please don’t ruin the economic and social benefits of the Ghana@50 by your political witch hunts because of Rawlings and associates money laundering activities and possible investigations. Don’t ruin Ghana’s image because of Muntaka Mubarack, Ayiraga, Bagbin and Ahwoi’s dishonesty and cover-ups. May God bless Ghana our motherland!
Kofi Nkrumah: Kwaku Frimpong, you stated so many good reasons why the current government of Ghana should put an end to the ``Ghana@50 Inquiry’’, but there are only two reasons amongst many, which score far more marks than the numerous ones you brought up, which make it necessary for the Inquiry to proceed. The first reason is that it is the constitutional responsibility of the government in power to address all issues of financial malfeasance which might have occurred during the reign of its predecessor, and to ensure that anyone implicated is handed over to the judiciary to deal with. The second reason is that the Inquiry is a necessary democratic procedure that helps to avoid the undemocratic system of just senselessly rounding up suspects, so that when it finally becomes established beyond reasonable doubt that someone is implicated, it will not look a case of witch-hunting. It’s, therefore, important that the people are made to understand that in spite of the cost to be incurred, we need to establish facts, for the law to take its course; to help ensure that our democracy guarantees equality before the law in practical terms; instead of a democracy that only shouts ``Rule of Law’’. I don’t want someone to tell me that because the farm-labourer stole only a chicken, the value of the stolen item must justify his trial in the smallest court of law, where only lay magistrates and a few staff carry out the prosecution. Just compare the total daily salaries of the police, the magistrate and the court staff to the value of the chicken, not to mention the time wasted by the police in taking statements before the thief is charged. If you think, the chicken stolen is spilt milk, then, I’m sorry you’ve got it all wrong. The stealing of the chicken is a crime and must be dealt with accordingly irrespective of whether it was stolen by farm labourer, or teacher. We are sick and tired of people using complex language to dismiss crime as spilt milk to set free dishonest ministers and state officials who have little sympathy for the poverty-stricken masses, when even foreigners are endeavouring to bring in resources to help get rid of malaria as it continues to cause frequent mortality, especially among children; Isn’t it a big SHAME? Okyeame: It’s all about the executive branch of the government interfering in the judiciary branch which shouldn’t happen in a democracy, period; and that is all Mr Frimpong is trying to let us understand.
Kwabena Yeboah: The article carries two main themes: (a) political witch hunt and (b) the purpose and usefulness of the commission. If it is true that Frimpong was drawing readers’ attention to the executive interference of the judiciary, then he does not understand the functions of these two democratic institutions. I saw nothing of the sort, so there is no conflict there. Mr Frimpong asserts in his article that there is no benefit to national interest in pursuing the enquiry. He makes the case to justify the over $50 million blow out, by employing cost/benefit analysis. According to him, since we cannot measure the joy and the feel-good factor that the celebration brought, the cost was justified. This is a bunch of ``huey’’.
CONCLUSION
It must be apparent to the reader that the most serious contributors to the debate were those with positive response to the article, in particular Mr Asante, who seem to be on the same wavelength with me on the issues. He paraphrased, as shown below, the questions I raised about the Inquiry Commission, in his eloquent manner, as he got frustrated about the lack of proper alternative response to my views in the article. I am taking this opportunity to invite, once again, those with alternative views to answer the questions, in particular the central question about two different bodies conducting the same investigations and the cost justification, with greater sophistication.
Asante: Those holding opposing views to mine, with few exceptions like Kofi Nkrumah, seem to have little tolerance for adult debate and frankly it’s a waste of time engaging you in any productive discourse. You are impervious to reasoning because of party loyalty haemorrhage. However, I will make one last attempt to distil the salient points from the article and ask for alternative views, not driven by party loyalty, for once.
(1) BNI is already investigating the `Ghana@50Celebrations’, so can someone tell us the justification for setting up another body to perform concurrently the same task? Is it not a waste of National Resource that everyone agrees is very limited?
(2) Is it democratically healthy for the opposition to spend unproductive hours in the dock, when they should be debating national issues and holding the government to account?
(3) Is it not better to be vigilant with our tangible assets and invest them wisely than to exhaust them with the hope of gaining a notional dividend? (4) Is it not true that the removal of the dark cloud over our fragile democracy brought about by the perceived witch hunt, will promote good working relationship between the government and the opposition?
(5) Finally, which of the two scenarios below will stand a better chance of saving life at a clinical theatre?-(1) Keep a watchful eye during surgical operation (2) Take a lax view during surgical operation but ensure constant monitoring after operation.
When these questions are properly addressed, you will begin to appreciate Mr Frimpong as a true patriot and also the concept of free speech in a true democracy. Kwaku Frimpong
