From a distance he looks like any other Rastafarian. He wears his dreadlocks with pride and prefers to let them dangle at his back. His two ears are buried in that thicket of locks, but he doesn?t need to strain to hear. He writes poems about turkeys and Christmas parties, and travels from place to place to do live recitals of his works. He is a poet with fine egalitarian views. He is decidedly unconventional and conventionally controversial. He hates awards and rewards for the things he does. He is, however, nonchalant about remunerations. He is bold enough to snub an award of an OBE from the Queen of England, but the Monarchy still respects him. He is Benjamin Zephaniah, a black British.
Benjamin Zephaniah is not the only Briton who has refused to be decorated by the Queen of England with her state awards; many others have done the same, including a venerable gentleman, who has been nominated for the honour on three different occasions, but snubbed the Queen an all those occasions. His was a matter of principle. On his part, Zephaniah rejected the award because of Britain?s involvement in the transatlantic slave trade, which the British Monarchy and the government have failed to officially apologise. He has a beef, a beef he has nursed since he knew about the evils of slavery, and he would not back down until he has seen a definitive change in the way things are done. And in his thinking, slavery hasn?t quite stopped; it persists in various forms and shapes in the age of enlightenment. He would deserve an award if his poems and books have succeeded in challenging the status quo. If the award will not change anything for humanity, except the recognition that he is a good guy, then he wouldn?t take it. He is no good until everybody is good. That is how people who are conscious of change think.
I have delayed my comment on Dr. Mo Ibrahim?s ?2.5Million award to Jaoquim Chissano, former president of Mozambique, because I didn?t know what to make of it when I read about it in the British tabloids. If presidents were elected by their people for anything other than the betterment of their living conditions, then Mr. Chissano deserves more than ?2.5Million for doing what he was elected to do anyway. If a president is given a mandate by his people to prosecute his political and economic agendas, and he does that successfully, if that ever happens, does he deserve an award for doing what his manifesto promised to accomplish? Does it therefore follow that he would have been prosecuted or at least received a terrible reprimand from a recognizable quarter if he had failed to do what he was expected to do? I am actually constrained to say exactly what I have to say, because the fellow who presented the award to Mr. Chissano is Busumuru Kofi Annan, a recipient of several awards and a Nobel Prize winner, a patriot in whose name the West African country of Ghana is pleased. A former United Nations Secretary-General must have seen it wise rewarding people for what they had to do.
?What a man can do, a man ought to do.? This is an important political statement established in dramatic literature by French political playwright Jean Anouilh. Doing what you have to do is a vindication of strength and conviction, and it is born out of the sheer desire to do that which has to be done- a truism made truer in Anouilh?s adaptation of Sophocles? Antigone. Reward is another thing, and it is not the motivation for doing that which you have to do. If I enroll at a college to follow a course which leads to an award of a degree on successful completion, my primary objective is the academic award I would get at the end of the programme, but my actual motivation is the education and the enlightenment that I would eventually receive. If I perform excellently and I am given a prize, it is only a bonus; it is part of my contract as a learner to learn excellently. And it is for my own good; the prize is never a motivation. My cousin John Dadzie-Mensah was awarded a cash prize of $5,000 by the Academy of Arts and Sciences last year for producing the best M-Phil research in Ghana over a ten year period. The research had earned him his M-Phil degree already; the money was just a bonus. His contract with the University of Ghana was to pass requisite examinations and receive a degree, not money.
Can we say the same thing for a democratically elected president or a military leader-turned-democrat in Africa? Chissano was given the award for being one of ?Africa?s success stories?, who made an ?outstanding contribution leading Mozambique from conflict to peace and democracy,? read Kofi Annan, as he presented the award. He added: ?We hope this award will persuade a new generation of young leaders to come forward and use their talents for the good of their country.? His record is that the 68 year old, who was president from 1986 to 2005, helped reduce poverty, encouraged women to be actively involved in economic and political life, and engineered democratic reform. He had not done those things for charity reasons; they were the things he was expected to do as president of the country for 19 years. Did the people of Mozambique expect anything less, if indeed, those achievements have changed the fortunes of that poor country? He had come for the good of his poor people, as all African leaders prophesy when they are first elected. So, if they end up doing good, why do we need to award them for what their people put them in charge to do? Is having the final say over a people for nearly twenty years not reward enough for one individual? He would have retired on his salary and would be cared for by the state forever. Is that not enough reward?
Mo Ibrahim?s defense on ITV, a British television channel, was as uninspiring as the factors that inspired the institution of the award. He said that it was about time Africans did something for themselves to prove that they are serious about the development of the continent. He compared the best African President award with the Nobel Prize that was instituted by Alfred Nobel to reward excellence for important service to humanity. The television presenter instantly clarified that the Nobel Prize is for all the peoples of the world, and it was not meant to reward politicians who help their individual countries. As he was impressed upon by the panel that giving cash incentives to promote good governance in Africa could not be the most effective way of improving lives on that continent, Mo?s only explanation was that the honour ?will shine a light on Africa.?
That light reflects a rather gloomy, dark side of Africa. The misfortune Africans have for long lived with is that it is customary for politicians to steal their people?s money, so those who do not steal, or are not known to have stolen, are heroes. The norm is not to steal; it is not to avoid stealing. So, if a president is coaxed with a $2.5Million award, to prevent him from stealing, then we might as well rotate the award and give the cash to them upfront, so that they would leave public funds alone. And, Mo Ibrahim concedes to this. That is why he has programmed the disbursement of the award such that recipients are not given the cash in one sum. A recipient gets the money over ten years, and an additional ?107,000 a year till they die. The reason for giving the cash in installments is that the Mo Ibrahim Foundation fears the recipients would use the lump sum to fund political parties. This defeats the objective of the award. It means that the recipients are not even trusted in the first instance. In fact, it is like the ?hide and seek game? our parents used to play with us when we were kids. We always knew where the next day?s school meals were kept but we could only have the allotted portions for the day. We were good boys if we were able to resist the temptation of tasting a bit of that big turkey in the fridge before daddy had a bite. And most of the time, daddy never wanted a bite anyway. Nevertheless, we would have received a knock or two on the head for having the first go.
Many a time, awards and rewards do not mean much. Perhaps, what folks missed in the recent James Watson racial gaffe was that the person who made the presentation to Watson in 1962 in Sweden was a black man. Yet, Watson thought then, and still thinks that blacks have unintelligent genes, but he still keeps the award and enjoys the proceeds from the investment he might have made with the big cheque that was given him. I found it not surprising that the first recipient of the Mo Ibrahim African democracy champion award did not even turn up at the London City Hall to receive the honour. Reports say he would pick up the prize in Egypt when he makes time. That is giving the Mo Ibrahim award a Benjamin Zephaniah rubbishing. It contrasts sharply with how the British media hunted down Doris Lessing, the winner of this year?s Nobel Prize for Literature at a flower shop, to inform her of the honour. Hers was a front page story. Chissano?s was tucked somewhere in a small corner in the middle pages of a few British tabloids. Of course, that wasn?t unexpected, the international media being what it is.
Still, Mozambique?s steady progress over the years is noteworthy. For a country that is recovering from the devastation caused by a bitter civil war that carried through until 1992, it has done well to have put in place effective macroeconomic and poverty alleviation policies. Over the last ten years, the Southern African country has sustained an 8% economic growth rate every year, and there are indications that it could keep the rhythm for a few more years. Poverty has been reduced from 69% in 1997 to 54% in 2003. The number of children in school has upped from 44% in 1999 to 76% in 2004. Infant and maternal mortality rates have also decreased considerably. Mozambique has been able to make these strides towards achieving her Millennium Development Goals, largely because of the strict adherence to the targets set out in the country?s special poverty alleviation strategy, PARPA- Plano de Accao para a Reducao da Pobreza Absoluta. Current President Armando Guebuza?s FRELIMO party, which won the country?s third democratic elections in 2004, has started implementing PARPA II.
Even so, Mozambique is still a poor country that is heavily dependent on aid and grant. Nearly 50% of the country?s population lives in poverty, with more than 3 million living in absolute poverty. Under a development framework dubbed ?Programme Aid Partners,? 18 international donors rain billions directly into the government?s budget, to help with the provision of basic amenities. The country?s achievements would pale beside these challenges. What then, is Chissano being honoured for? He has done well, though.
The author is a freelance journalist; he lives in London, where he also teaches Journalism and English as a foreign language. Email: quesiquesi@hotmail.co.uk or btawiah@hotmail.com.
Views expressed by the author(s) do not necessarily reflect those of GhanaHomePage.
