As Chairman of NPP-USA, my attention has been called to a suit purported to be filed by Hon. J.B. Danquah-Adu the current MP for Abuakwa North who recently lost by four votes to Prof. Samuel Amoako a member of NPP-USA and of NPP (Ghana). Of the ten contestants fielded by NPP-USA in the Party’s parliamentary primaries, only Dr. Amoako and another emerged as winners. And now Mr. Danquah-Adu wants the courts to do for him what he could not accomplish with the voters. It is everyone’s right to sue but let us analyze the basis of this particular suit for its true implications.
Mr. Danquah-Adu protests that Dr Amoako is a dual citizen of Ghana and the USA and therefore according to the Ghana Constitution, Dr. Amoako should be stripped of his victory. Put another way, Dr. Amoako should not have been permitted to run for the Abuakwa North seat at all. Is this correct? Both Dr. Amoako and Mr. Danquah-Adu ran as NPP candidates for the seat. Therefore let us first examine what NPP’s Constitution says about dual nationality as a restrictive criterion. Before reading further I make a disclaimer that only Dr. Amoako can and will respond to the specific question at hand. My objective is to raise the broader issue of dual nationality with respect to specified national positions in Ghana.
Article 12 - Selection of Parliamentary Candidates- lists the basis for qualifying to apply for NPP’s Parliamentary Candidate for a Constituency as follows: i- is a known and active member for at least 2 years; ii- is a registered member and voter in the constituency; iii- is of good character; iv- is otherwise of good standing; -v has paid the prescribed fee ; vi – qualifies under electoral laws to be a parliamentary candidate for the constituency and vii- has signed the “undertaking for parliamentary candidates” Except for a passing reference to “electoral laws” in criteria number 6 (vi), there is no reference to being barred on the basis of being a dual citizen in the NPP requirements. I will grant that the reference to electoral laws may mean such a thing so we shall go to Ghana’s Constitution. The writers of the next version of the Party’s Constitution must use more precise language with the proper citations of referenced documents.
Chapter 10- The Legislature- has this restrictive language: “A person shall not be qualified to be a Member of Parliament if he (a) owes allegiance to a country other than Ghana”. (Article 94 section 2 (a) – 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana) This is one restriction that was specifically left to stand in the Ghana Citizen Act that granted dual citizenship. We are stuck with it for now but is it being interpreted correctly without allowing for the proper process?
Here is the operating question: When does one qualify to BE A MEMBER of Parliament? Does this happen before one files their application with their party for the primary? Or is it when one wins the final election over all the opposing parties? Does it happen when one is just about to be sworn in and who makes this determination? These are the thorny questions concerning the restriction of people with dual citizenship from holding specific positions in Ghana’s public life. Both the NPP and Ghana’s Constitutions are silent on these questions so let us look at real-life cases for an answer, something the lawyers call precedence.
I was in Ghana in 2005 when Hon. Kofi Ameyaw was being vetted for a Deputy Minister position. He was asked whether he had ever held Australian citizenship to which he answered yes. He was then asked whether he had renounced it and could prove so and the answer again was in the affirmative. Mr Ameyaw was asked to show his proof of renunciation to the Counsel for the Committee who looked it over and pronounced it in order. Hon Ameyaw went on to be confirmed by the Vetting Committee that included members from all parties. A more recent case suspended another Deputy Minister’s (Ms. Victoria Bright) confirmation until she produced her proof of renunciation. She subsequently did and now has her position. The limited number of cases shows that the decision to apply the restrictive language does not come into play UNTIL one is ready to be sworn into the position to actually BE. Until you ARE, you are not and the restrictive language does not apply so the parliament of Ghana seems to have interpreted this disqualification in Article 94 (2) (a). Before the reader makes a distinction between Deputy Minister and an MP, please know that by Ghana’s Constitution, a Minister (and Deputy) are required to also qualify under the same rules as an MP. Here is a clear case of precedence demonstrating the application of what is good for the goose.
As more Ghanaians Living Abroad seek involvement in all aspects of our nation’s development, this section in the Constitution and the Citizen Act are begging to be re-examined and this should be done with speed. Otherwise they become an anachronistic pantheon of rules to protect the interest of the few who have managed to get in and keep others out at Ghana’s own loss. The irony is that the nation then plays a game of who will be next to be exposed as a dual citizen since not all are righteous as the good book says. Who needs that for a national past-time when good people are rejected because they are dual citizens? Let me end with the big question- where did all these exclusionary laws come from and why? To be continued….
By Kofi A. Boateng,
Chairman- NPP-USA, June 17, 2008
Views expressed by the author(s) do not necessarily reflect those of GhanaHomePage. As Chairman of NPP-USA, my attention has been called to a suit purported to be filed by Hon. J.B. Danquah-Adu the current MP for Abuakwa North who recently lost by four votes to Prof. Samuel Amoako a member of NPP-USA and of NPP (Ghana). Of the ten contestants fielded by NPP-USA in the Party’s parliamentary primaries, only Dr. Amoako and another emerged as winners. And now Mr. Danquah-Adu wants the courts to do for him what he could not accomplish with the voters. It is everyone’s right to sue but let us analyze the basis of this particular suit for its true implications.
Mr. Danquah-Adu protests that Dr Amoako is a dual citizen of Ghana and the USA and therefore according to the Ghana Constitution, Dr. Amoako should be stripped of his victory. Put another way, Dr. Amoako should not have been permitted to run for the Abuakwa North seat at all. Is this correct? Both Dr. Amoako and Mr. Danquah-Adu ran as NPP candidates for the seat. Therefore let us first examine what NPP’s Constitution says about dual nationality as a restrictive criterion. Before reading further I make a disclaimer that only Dr. Amoako can and will respond to the specific question at hand. My objective is to raise the broader issue of dual nationality with respect to specified national positions in Ghana.
Article 12 - Selection of Parliamentary Candidates- lists the basis for qualifying to apply for NPP’s Parliamentary Candidate for a Constituency as follows: i- is a known and active member for at least 2 years; ii- is a registered member and voter in the constituency; iii- is of good character; iv- is otherwise of good standing; -v has paid the prescribed fee ; vi – qualifies under electoral laws to be a parliamentary candidate for the constituency and vii- has signed the “undertaking for parliamentary candidates” Except for a passing reference to “electoral laws” in criteria number 6 (vi), there is no reference to being barred on the basis of being a dual citizen in the NPP requirements. I will grant that the reference to electoral laws may mean such a thing so we shall go to Ghana’s Constitution. The writers of the next version of the Party’s Constitution must use more precise language with the proper citations of referenced documents.
Chapter 10- The Legislature- has this restrictive language: “A person shall not be qualified to be a Member of Parliament if he (a) owes allegiance to a country other than Ghana”. (Article 94 section 2 (a) – 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana) This is one restriction that was specifically left to stand in the Ghana Citizen Act that granted dual citizenship. We are stuck with it for now but is it being interpreted correctly without allowing for the proper process?
Here is the operating question: When does one qualify to BE A MEMBER of Parliament? Does this happen before one files their application with their party for the primary? Or is it when one wins the final election over all the opposing parties? Does it happen when one is just about to be sworn in and who makes this determination? These are the thorny questions concerning the restriction of people with dual citizenship from holding specific positions in Ghana’s public life. Both the NPP and Ghana’s Constitutions are silent on these questions so let us look at real-life cases for an answer, something the lawyers call precedence.
I was in Ghana in 2005 when Hon. Kofi Ameyaw was being vetted for a Deputy Minister position. He was asked whether he had ever held Australian citizenship to which he answered yes. He was then asked whether he had renounced it and could prove so and the answer again was in the affirmative. Mr Ameyaw was asked to show his proof of renunciation to the Counsel for the Committee who looked it over and pronounced it in order. Hon Ameyaw went on to be confirmed by the Vetting Committee that included members from all parties. A more recent case suspended another Deputy Minister’s (Ms. Victoria Bright) confirmation until she produced her proof of renunciation. She subsequently did and now has her position. The limited number of cases shows that the decision to apply the restrictive language does not come into play UNTIL one is ready to be sworn into the position to actually BE. Until you ARE, you are not and the restrictive language does not apply so the parliament of Ghana seems to have interpreted this disqualification in Article 94 (2) (a). Before the reader makes a distinction between Deputy Minister and an MP, please know that by Ghana’s Constitution, a Minister (and Deputy) are required to also qualify under the same rules as an MP. Here is a clear case of precedence demonstrating the application of what is good for the goose.
As more Ghanaians Living Abroad seek involvement in all aspects of our nation’s development, this section in the Constitution and the Citizen Act are begging to be re-examined and this should be done with speed. Otherwise they become an anachronistic pantheon of rules to protect the interest of the few who have managed to get in and keep others out at Ghana’s own loss. The irony is that the nation then plays a game of who will be next to be exposed as a dual citizen since not all are righteous as the good book says. Who needs that for a national past-time when good people are rejected because they are dual citizens? Let me end with the big question- where did all these exclusionary laws come from and why? To be continued….
By Kofi A. Boateng,
Chairman- NPP-USA, June 17, 2008
Views expressed by the author(s) do not necessarily reflect those of GhanaHomePage.
