Nkrumah’s Joy, NPP’s Pain.

On the occasion of Nkrumah’s centenary, a lot has been said about Nkrumah’s works, vision, ideology, and shortfalls. Ghanaians, more so C.P.P supporters and their N.D.C colleagues, are delighted that the government has honoured Nkrumah by celebrating his hundredth birthday and declaring the 21st of September a statutory public holiday. To them Nkrumah deserves to be honoured as such. NPP die- hards, however, have expressed resonant reservations about the government’s decision to refer to that day (21st September) as founder’s day. According to them, Nkrumah alone cannot be referred to as the founder of Ghana. One of such people, the highly esteemed Professor Mike Ocquaye, was unequivocal in affirming this.

Professor Ocquaye, in an article published by the Daily Graphic, stated that the battle for independence began even before Nkrumah was born; therefore, he alone cannot be credited for Ghana’s independence. He also indicated that the UGCC had begun the struggle for independence long before it invited Nkrumah from London to take up the position of secretary. He finally stated that Ghana’s independence should be seen as the collective effort of many Ghanaians, the Big six inclusive.

Similar sentiments were expressed by Dr. Arthur Kennedy, in an article titled ‘Nkrumah in Retrospect’. He indicated that:

‘‘When in 1871, Fanti chiefs joined together in the Fanti confederacy, under the leadership of Ghartey, Horton and Blankson, they were fighting for independence!’’ ‘‘When Yaa Asantewaa marched at the head of the Asante army in 1900 to fight the British, they were fighting for independence.’’

‘‘When the leaders of the U.G.C.C met at Salt pond to form the U.G.C.C and to launch their enterprise, they were fighting for independence.’’ Then he goes on: ‘‘The effort to make Nkrumah our sole founder is reminiscent of the sycophancy that made PDA and most of his excesses possible.’’

Arthur Kennedy’s reservations epitomises the indescribable pain many NPP supporters have had to endure as a result of the government’s decision to refer to 21st September-Nkrumah’s birthday as founder’s day. N.P.P supporters think that day should be referred to as Founders’ day. They see it anything apart from this as a calculated attempt by the NDC government to undermine the efforts of J.B Danquah and other members of the UGCC who were instrumental in the struggle for independence.

Now, you only risk becoming hypertensive if you hastily conclude that efforts are being made, ostensibly by the government, to make ‘Nkrumah the sole founder of Ghana’. That is virtually impossible; history makes it clear that independence came as a result of a collective struggle in which the Big six, Paa grant, the ex-service men who lost their lives in the 1948 riots and many other Ghanaians were involved. That is how it has always been and that is how it will remain for ever! That, incontrovertibly, explains why we have the portrait of the Big Six on our national currency, the Cedi. Not only that, many other public places and institutions have been named after members of the Big Six and other Ghanaians who were instrumental in the independence struggle.

It wouldn’t be out of place, however, to refer to Nkrumah as the founder of the Ghanaian nation considering the radical manner in which he agitated for and won Ghana’s independence. History makes it clear that at the time the U.G.C.C was treading the path of ‘self government within the shortest possible time’, Nkrumah wanted ‘self government now’ and had to break away to form his own party, the C.P.P.

The U. G.C.C’s ‘Self government within the shortest possible time’ was vague and could not have brought pressure to bear on the British colonialists; independence, therefore, would have been delayed by many more years. Nkrumah on the other hand was clear and direct; ‘Ghanaians want independence now, no more, no less!’

We are told that at a time that the British had finalized arrangements to grant Ghana independence, the main opposition leader, Dr. Busia, led a delegation to England to petition the queen not to grant independence to Ghana. It is only fair for me to quote the exact words of Dr Busia for the benefit of readers:

‘’ We still need you in the Gold Coast. Your experiment there is not yet complete. Sometimes we wonder why you seem in such a hurry to wash your hands off the Gold Coast.’’ Busia went on to add that the British shouldn’t grant independence to the Gold Coast because Gold Coast wasn’t ready for ‘parliamentary democracy’. This presumably, was because they (the opposition) didn’t like the idea of Nkrumah leading a newly independent Gold Coast. However, the queen ignored their petition and went ahead to grant the Gold Coast independence.

The struggle for independence is synonymous to the national football team’s struggle for world cup participation. The Black Stars since independence had been trying relentlessly hard to qualify for the world cup; efforts were made by many generation of ‘Black Stars’; the likes of Aggrey Fynn, Ibrahim Sunday, Abdul Razaak, Dogo Moro, Mohammed Polo, Jones Attuquafio, Opoku Afriyie, Abedi Ayew Pele, Tony Yeboah, C.K Akunnor, and many other players did their best for many years to qualify Ghana to the world cup, but their efforts were futile. It wasn’t until 2005 that a Stephen Appiah led side, that included the Likes of Essien, Muntari, John Mensah, and Sammie Adjei qualified Ghana to her first world cup in Germany. Ghanaians will forever remember them as the heroes who qualified Ghana to her first world cup without necessarily taking into cognizance the fact that the foundation for an eventual world cup participation had been laid by their predecessors.

It is almost the same with the founder’s day issue; Nkrumah, in fighting for independence, took the bull by the horn. It was a risky thing to do; he was imprisoned and probably tortured, yet he continued his fight against colonialism in spite of the obstacles, imprisonment, sufferings, and difficulties that confronted him.

Leaders of the U.G.C.C realized that a cat needed to be belled, but much as they tried to bell it, they weren’t successful. It was Nkrumah who belled the stubborn cat after eight years of hard work.

Nkrumah, unlike members of the U.G.C.C, did not only struggle for independence; he won independence and deserves to be referred to as the founder of Ghana. The foregoing notwithstanding, it would be appropriate for me to concede that the struggle for independence predated Nkrumah, just like Arthur Kennedy indicated. But unlike the latter who thinks it is unacceptable to refer to Nkrumah’s birthday as founder’s day, I’m of the opinion that it isn’t out of place. It isn’t out of place either, to refer to that day-21st September, as founders’ day, to accommodate J.B Danquah, his U.G.C.C colleagues, and other Ghanaians who played enviable roles in the struggle for independence. Samuel K. Obour samuelkwason@yahoo.com

The Author is studying Communication Studies at the Ghana Institute of Journalism.