“No foreign policy - no matter how ingenious - has any chance of success if it is born in the minds of a few and carried in the hearts of none.” – Henry Kissinger.
The Constitution Review Commission consultations, has been largely successful, albeit low key event. What in my opinion, is very sensitive and topical, as far as foreign policy is concerned is Article 73 of the 1992 constitution. There is therefore the need for a bi - partisan approach to address this to ensure that the Presidency sign up to foreign policies that represent Ghana and the ordinary Ghanaian’s interest. As a foreign policy enthusiast, I argue that Countries who’s sovereignty and territorial integrity is and have remained reputable are those who have shaped their foreign policy to represent the ordinary citizen of the country they represent.
The same cannot be said about Ghana because a closer look at current Ghana’s foreign policy paints a different picture. In fact, our current foreign policy has been merely reduced to the peripheral diplomacy, one which David Lloyd George rightly describes as “waste of time”. The flip side of this is that, Ghana, country whose citizen are known to take pride in hard work; a land rich with resources; and a land of mighty talents, have sadly become cheap beggars with cheap bargaining power and thus, a common block factory in Turkey masquerade to give Ghana over $600 million loan, and the presidency wants all Ghanaians to acknowledge it as an invaluable achievement worthy of the Better Ghana Agenda - Green Book! As if this not enough, the Presidency travels with the tax payers money to China only for the Chinese Government to indebt Ghana with trillions of dollars just after handshakes, state parade, Chinese tea, special fried rice and perhaps, a bowl of wantong soup.
The scares of the current shambolic Ghana foreign policy, in my humble view is as due to Article 73 of 1992 Constitution of Ghana. In a lay man’s term, Article 73 propels the sitting President to make contacts, exchange handshakes and presents valuable gold gifts like forty eight thousand Gold Watches; and entrenched positions such as the most recent “Dzi Wo Fie Asem” , all in the name of International Relations. My argument however is that the presidency, after all, is not to blame because Article 73 of the 1992 constitution has been misread, misunderstood, misrepresented and misapplied by successive Executives in the fourth republic. Given that the framers of the constitution clearly expressed their intention in both the spirit and the letter of the article, one wonders why this has not been challenged till date. I bet you are asking the same question as you read this article but the answer is simply found from the positioning of the article. Take a second look at the article and check where it is positioned, and you will need no more convincing that this is biggest clause that need urgent fixing because it has so far been more of a bane than a blessing.
Article 73; “The Government of Ghana shall conduct its international affairs in consonance with the accepted principles of public international law and diplomacy in a manner consistent with the National interest of Ghana” Governance, as we all know, doesn’t come sealed off in distinct and separate categories or sections. Everything impacts just about everything. In fact, Einstein’s theory of general relativity teaches that all matter in the universe has a gravitational pull on all other matter. Of course, we the citizens of Ghana don’t need a lesson in physics to recognize the reality of how foreign policy which is the driver of Ghana’s International Relation can radically and even tragically impact the nation, even generations later. However, how the Presidency represent Ghana in terms of; who we are, where we are, why we are, what we are—these all have been affected to some degree by the actions of a presidency who, by courtesy of article 73, have become completely out of our control, hence the careless and unrepentant approach to brandishing the citizenry as alms seekers.
Why Article 73? The article was purported to set out a framework for Ghana foreign policy, which the framers of the constitution clearly spelt out the important role of the government; which consists of the Executive (Presidency) the Legislature (The people) and the Judiciary (Law Adjudicators); needed to perform in concert to bring about the desired outcome – which is, to achieve the ‘National Interest’. In my view, this was carefully grafted with the aim of developing a common national consensus in relation to how Ghana conducts its international affairs. With this in mind, let me attempt to underscore the significance of key phrases in the article.
“The Government of Ghana Shall Conduct its International Affairs…” I am ever so amazed when I hear the Presidency wrongly referred as government. Well, I have come to accept that, that is one of the negative traits of colonialism. Under the 1992 constitution, Ghana chooses a presidential system and not parliamentary system of government. The only extension as we all know is the requirement that majority of the president’s ministers be chosen from parliament. I am aware that a red flag has already been raised about this absurdity so I will not belabor that point. In fact, even first year secondary school students who have taken ‘Government’ as a subject, have knowledge of the quotation “power corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Hence, architects of democracy like John Locke and Montesquieu argue separation of powers to ensure checks and balances. Thomas Hobbs rightly disagree because his reference of the UK system of government saw nothing wrong with a monarchy merely doing ceremonial diplomacy without any official government authority. To him, the real government business is undertaken by the majority on the Green Benches, headed by the Prime Minister, so the ordinary person – UK citizen- views and interests is well represented at all time. In a similar vein, let us think again and ask ourselves whether real government business in Ghana takes place on the floor of parliament? The answer is simply NO! because we do not operate a parliamentary system of government. Let us think again and ask, - why then does the presidency refer to itself as “Government”? Yes! such convenient absurdity has given legitimacy to the wrong application of Article 73. Government as we know it in Ghana terms at least, encompasses three institutions; namely, the Executive (President and Ministers), the Legislature (Parliament) and the Judiciary (Courts) However, by sheer positioning, Article 73 has inconsistently been listed as a sole function of the Executive.
“…accepted principles of public international law…” One does not need to be a law expert to know that our foreign policies have legal implications which transcends the Nation’s sovereignty. Therefore, the interpretation of the National’s interest is not limited to the president’s handpicked Attorney General and Minister of Justice but also the independent Judiciary, which is a branch of government in its own right. If nothing at all, we know the case of the Chinese sex ring which was recently busted in Ghana. I am yet to follow the prosecution but I won’t be surprised if the Chinese do make an arrangement to trial these alleged Criminals on their own soil. But why not, if they are Ghana current financiers. The Koreans who also threw noble citizens of Ghana and Ivory Coast in our waters may also be spared jail in Ghana as part of STX deal. Whether or not all these passes the test of accepted principles of public international law, is a question that could have been easily addressed should the judicial strand of government be allowed to perform it role in relation to article 73.
“diplomacy in a manner consistent with the National interest of Ghana…” There is no question that our ever travelling Foreign Ministers and Presidents, whether for medical reasons or for loan soliciting, the propaganda in the air gives us some belief that some diplomacy is being undertaken. Whether or not they are consistent with the National Interest of Ghana, is a whole new landmine that would be tackled on another day. From my spectacles and how the nation is being traded cheaply by the current administration, I am tempted to sadly posit that Ghana diplomats are increasingly becoming a reality of Peter Ustinov quote – “A (Ghana) diplomat these days is nothing but a head-waiter who's allowed to sit down occasionally.”
The way Forward!! – Ghana Need Strong Institutions not Strong Men A time has come for the creation of a separate chapter in our constitution to deal with Diplomacy and International Relations. I pray the Constitutional Review Commission to heed to this call. What Ghana as an emerging economy need is a Presidency that is mandated by the constitution to develop comprehensive foreign policy which would be ratified by parliament . By doing so, Ghana would adopt a bi-partisan approach to dotting all the ‘ i’s’ and crossing all the ‘ t’s’ of such policies, so that presidency would get the best deal for the country whenever Ghana is represented abroad.
BY: ANDREWS OWUSU OSEI kojosofo@hotmail.com
Copyright © 1994 - 2024 GhanaWeb. All rights reserved.
