Dear Sir,
Proposal for the removal of all age limitations as prerequisite for holding public office other than the voting age of 18 in the 1992 Constitution of Ghana
We the members of this group, in outright confidence in the youth of Ghana, write to propose a review in all those sections of the 1992 constitution that prescribes ages other than eighteen as prerequisite for candidacy into a public office. In this regard, ARTICLE 62 (b) and all other clauses, provisions or sections in tandem with the stated article should be reviewed to reflect a minimum age requirement of 18 years.
We are of the view that if the 18 year old is considered an adult and is thus believed to make a rightful or reasonable choice in who becomes his leader, then extending to him that same turn of being voted for is to all intent and purposes in order.
We believe among other things, that the constitution must inspire, challenge a people’s imaginations and equip them in every way with a sense of responsibility that makes them leaders right from the onset.
Identifying with a street understanding of democracy that says “let the people decide”, we are convinced beyond measure that the people of Ghana have consistently proven to be wise and discerning in the exercise of their choice of leadership over the years and would be able to ascertain whether at a point in time a contesting eighteen year old best suites their aspirations—unless the commission thinks otherwise, which we sincerely doubt.
We also wish to submit that we are comfortable even if the commission decides to expel all age limitations including age 18 such that the basis for contesting is solely on the foundations of whether the contesting candidate in question is a citizen of Ghana and is of sound mind. The rest lies in the court of the people in whose judgement we are ready to uphold.
It is in this spirit that we the members of President at Eighteen Campaign Movement submit this petition. We await your favourable response.
PRESIDENT @ 18
....that all men are created equal....
Thomas Jefferson
An 18 year old youth, able to transpose his idealisms to reality, exercising courage in the first instance and meeting all the financial requirements in fulfilment of the office he seeks and being able to convince the people beyond measure to believe and vote for his presidential bid is certainly not an ordinary 18 year old youth. What else should be the considerations of a nation other than results? If the answers to the questions of underdevelopment, hunger, strife, disease, pain, death and the likes could be found in an 18 year old, should we by reason of prejudice ignore this messiah?
When a state places so much priority on age, she only succeeds in imprisoning the imaginations of her people. She limits the individual from what he can or cannot do. If by the thinking of our forefathers an 18 year old is deemed fit and capable of exercising reasonable judgement in choosing for his or her self a leader; the contention is that why can’t he or she also be voted for? It may sound absurd, because quite understandably, “the ideas and prejudices of the ruling class have created such crushing weights on the minds of many.”
Over the years, the youth is unfortunately referred to as future leaders, making them docile until a much later age, when most of their counterparts in other countries are putting their energy to use, hitting blockbusters and making huge impacts. Others are sitting on board meetings, partaking in governance, driving policies, and adding massively to technology. They have proven over and over again that given the opportunity much can be expected.
It is such a paradox when the 18 year old is referred to as adult capable of reason when he/she commits a crime; but in another instance he is deemed inadequate when it comes to holding a political office. It’s high time those who refer to themselves as the paragons of FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS collapse these walls of segmentation and open the door for the youth to contribute their quota to good governance.
The extensionist viewpoint to this proposition, obviously meant to discredit and ridicule the point, may for instance be to say that if an 18 year old should, why not all human beings regardless of their age? But even this strengthens the point further. A baby once born is naturally endowed with a profound gift of rights; one of such rights is choice. Although one may not comprehend a baby’s desire at one point in time, a plea to ignorance does not in any way nullify the claim to the existence of this right. If a one day old baby ably declares its intension to run for public office such as Assembly Member, Member of Parliament or President of the Republic, let nothing restrain the intentions of the baby other than the will of the people at the polls. Let the people decide; is this not the crux of democracy?
Others assert that realistically an 18 year old may not have gathered enough experience to occupy public office. But the question is, would that same 18 year old have gathered enough experience to choose a leader wisely? And what becomes of the answer to the question of fairness to an 18 year old that pops up as an exception, having all the requisite qualifications, including “experience”, except for her age?
It is important to recognise that legislations are not only meant to ensure law and order, they are also meant to inspire and challenge imaginations. After all, what is the essence of a state when it is so much in doubt about the capabilities of its citizens; when it is so fraudulently afraid to stimulate the imaginations of its people; when it is so ready to apply the rules of limitation than that of freedom; when it preaches the virtues of democracy but is not prepared to grow in its dynamism.
A glittering generality such as democracy was a gift of somebody’s imaginations, the rest are what the people decided to add to it; and we also have an equal chance to let others learn from us. Making your people perceive or believe that things are possible is one way of speeding up growth and development in any country. A confident population would certainly go out there to become global leaders. And this may be in the fields of business and commerce, agriculture, politics, public speaking, engineering, inventions, economics, religion and a host of others.
Child prodigies are gifts to their nations; these are kids with exceptional capabilities. The likes of Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832), British philosopher, economist, and jurist, who founded the doctrine of utilitarianism was reading serious treatises at the age of three, playing the violin at age five, and studying Latin and French at age six. Again, we are told that by age 12 he had entered the University of Oxford where he studied law, and was admitted to the bar. Ghana’s own Tsatsu Tsikata is one such personality; little Mordecai, the chap who represented Ghana at the United Nations Child conference and now an active campaigner on global warming is certainly another – and there are many more.
The people need to dream and that dream must certainly be big. Leadership requires responsibility and for every parent the most important thing they may perceptively want to see is the fulfilment of raising responsible children-purposeful and initiative driven; have we for a moment thought of the impact on a child who knows that at her age she is capable of running for public office, including the Presidency?
Out of their homes, gushed out men and women of inflammable social and ethnic origins. In jubilant mode, they held up in colourful gatherings throughout Kenya-it was the birth of a new constitution. Although new, this constitution like all the others, carry’s the prejudice of age limitations in vying for public office. Ghana has a chance through its ongoing constitutional review process to open up the future to its people. Should this materialise, it would be the first country on earth to have demonstrated such enormous confidence in its population and the inviolability of their choices.
The temptation for others to assume to be wiser than the people is quite unavoidable. The tendency of concluding on the questions of the “what ifs...” what if an 18 year old shows up and the people vote for him...? Exactly the point, why should a self acclaimed sage determine what is good or bad for the people? That would certainly not be democracy but autocracy. In cases of leadership, the people must always decide. If at a point in time, the people so desire and decide to have for themselves an 18 year old as their Assembly man or woman, District Chief Executive, Member of Parliament, Minister or even President, as absurd as it may sound to the so-called wise, so be it!
The advocacy as already established is fundamental to all, but Africa more than any needs this liberating reform now. For a very long time its people have enjoyed very limited freedoms, counting from the period of slavery, to colonialism, through to independence, to the era of civilian and military despotism, coupled with the neo-colonial conditions the continent faces generally.
The principles of Freedom and Liberty have a direct correlation with the level of development of a country. A people’s choice of colour could go a long way to show the freedoms they have. No nation can develop fully when its liberties and freedoms are stolen. The misconception held on countries that are breaking through the roofs of financial success like China is that its people have limited freedoms. Contrary to this assertion, the freedoms and liberties of the Chinese were not curtailed but rather contained as history will show how for instance, Chairman Mao gave the people the freedom and liberty to import whatever goods they required over a period of time, on the condition that they were able to produce exactly what they had been allowed to import. Today, China is the best producer destination and the second largest economy in the world. Hu Jing Tao, China’s current President is today referred to as a peace time developer.
Currently, youth movements across the world including President @ 18 Campaign Movement is proclaiming with one voice - “remove the barrier; give us a chance! There were days in Ghana when the basis for voting or being voted for was tied to educational qualifications and access to property worth not less than 6 pound sterling (that was a lot of money then). But all these changed. We moved to a franchise age of 25 years, followed by 21 and arrived to 18. Elsewhere, America for instance denied people this right all together just because of the colour of their skin and some for the fact that they were born women. Today young people are asking intelligent questions and attempting to climb the heaps even when they are told that they lack experience or it is impossible.
The young inexperienced starlets of Ghana in the just ended South African World cup games proved to the world what they could do if given the chance. Contrary to the expectation of missing the Michael Essien’s and Laryea Kinston’s, these young inexperienced starlets crystallised by the Dede Ayew’s played their hearts out in search for answers for their beloved country. This is what our young men and women have to offer - their hearts! President at 18, it is possible!
Africa needs to find its spirit now!
Ernesto Yeboah
ernestoyeboah@yahoo.com
(September 14, 2010)
The author is a media Practitioner, a Political Activist and also the author of the new insightful and inspirational book; Students’ Manifesto-the promise of a fulfilling student movement in Africa.
