Kweku Baako, How Dare You?

By Kwadwo Poku

For the past couple of weeks, I've been trying so hard to divest my mind off the balderdash promulgated on this forum by Kweku Baako concerning the '79 coup, and I have been doing so by soliloquizing the words 'NO HE DID NOT SAY THAT'' but to no avail. So, was I to continue to live in the illusion that he did not say that?

In his voluminous response to an unfriendly piece by Professor Okoampa Ahoofe, Mr. Baako paradoxically doxologized the June 4th Coup but condemned the celebration/commemoration of it's anniversary. Folks, do you see how incongruous this sounds. Why can't that which was good ('79 coup) according to the all knowing Kweku Baako not be celebrated?

He went on to say that the principle objectives of the '79 coup was to seek the permanent disengagement of the military from civil administration. If that purpose was that which agglutinated Mr. Baako to the actions of June 4th '79 and continues to make him justify and rationalize the unnecessary acts of a bunch of junior officers who were motivated by hatred towards their superiors, why then did the military return on 31st Dec. '81, usurping the will of the nation? I would've stomached this trash had it come from the pig of Kwesi Pratt, after all it's characteristic of him to be a political prostitute, but for a political powerhouse like Kweku Baako whom I have quoted many times in my write ups to hold this idiosyncratic view is indicative of our democracy being in crisis.

When it comes to the '79 coup, don't let any political has-been tell you otherwise.

It was uncalled for, unnecessary, a waste of precious time and in the words of my colleague Dr. Justice Sarpong of Texas, June 4th was armed robbery. The SMC 2 led by Gen. Akufo overthrew the SMC 1 in a bloodless coup when Gen. Acheampong demanded the military involvement after the Yes/No referendum which he dubbed unigov. Also the SMC 2 did not metamorphose into a political party unlike the PNDC that morphed to be NDC, they were on their way out and had no strings attached. The canonicity of the constitution for the 3rd Republic was even indicative of their exit. Political parties had been formed and election date cast in stone. So why does Mr. Baako continue to delude himself by postulating that the coup was good for the nation because of the permanent disengagement of the military whilst the military were on their way out? Even the fact that Gen. Akufo's led SMC 2 spared the lives of Rawlings after the batched coup in May and of Gen. Acheampong after the bloodless coup proves the point.

The actions of the '79 coup gave birth to 31st Dec. coup, which led to 11yrs of dictatorship under the PNDC and brought the 4th Republic in '92 which is being fueled by a sham constitution that continues to legitimize Rawlings who's nothing but a criminal. Also because of the actions of June 4th, Rawlings is today a very wealthy man, he has educated his children abroad and has fraudulently sold Nsawam Canneries (a state owned company) to his wife as chronicled by Mr. Baako in his rejoinder. So was the "79 coup good for the nation? May be Mr Baako should look in the eyes of countless Ghanaians who lost love ones under the AFRC or the families of the murdered Justices who were killed after the return of the military on 31st Dec.1981, for leading the charge in abolishing the special courts set up by the AFRC and tell them it was good. May be he should ask whether he would have spent a couple of precious youthful yrs in jail had the '79 coup not taken place and later given birth to the coup of '81. Need I say more?

If Mr. Baako had said he supported the '79 coup back then, but looking back in retrospect the principle objectives were not achieved, therefore the actions of June 4th were not good for the nation, then he would have made sense. Also if he doesn't want to be perceived as a political has-been or a journalistic spent force, then I suggest he shifts his paradigm on this position because the eat your cake and have it politics of his is very disappointing given his background as a political powerhouse.

Is he oblivious of the fact that such ill advised pronouncements feeds into the entitlement mentality of the unrepentant wastrel? It even beggars to wonder whether he had dinner with the Rawlingses before making those tosh statements. What a disappointment.

Kwadwo Poku N Y