Dear Sir, I wish to react to the publication of 15th June 2008 on your website with the above heading.
Facts, they say, are sacred-comment is free.
It is a fact that Nana Akufo-Addo got a third class degree in Economics at the University of Ghana. The idea that it was a “back door” degree is an unnecessary and irresponsible slur on the integrity of such a fine institution.
Such comments come from the same stable as those who created the shameful doctrine of “shitocracy”-the idea that it was proper to respond to journalistic criticism by throwing human faeces on the premises of the newspaper. These are the Cassius Clays of Palaver who have specialised in descending into the gutter of yellow journalism. They disgrace our nation anytime they open their foul, putrid mouths. The desperate attempts to smear Akufo-Addo with wild, unproven allegations of cocaine abuse are not cutting any ice with the Ghanaian people who see them as nothing but a feverish effort to divert attention from the real issues at stake in the December elections- the records of the competing parties, their visions for the future and the leadership qualities of their candidates.
Akufo-Addo attempted to stand for the presidency of the Ghana Bar Association on one occasion only and that was in 1995, the year of the famous “kume preko” demonstration which he led and which shook the NDC government to its very foundation. He withdrew his candidacy on the floor of the conference as he feared that he would involve the Bar too strongly in partisan politics.His speech was well received by the members of the Association, especially as he had been for five years the successful leader of the biggest branch of the Bar, the Greater Accra Branch.
There is nothing wrong with Akufo-Addo’s legal qualification. He is a member of the Middle Temple of the Inns of Court in London, having been called to the English Bar in July 1971. He was subsequently called to the Ghanaian Bar in July 1975. The “fault” with his law qualification exists only in the fetid imagination of the “shitocrats”.
We can compare the legal careers of the two men- one, a brilliant barrister, perhaps the outstanding advocate of his generation, whose landmark cases abound in the Ghana Law Reports of the last thirty years; the other, a respected academic lawyer who specialised in arcane areas of the law such as taxation, with a handful of publications to his credit- to determine who has done what with his qualifications. It is not what you do as a student that matters- it is what you do with your subsequent life.
If academic achievement was the basis of political advancement, Winston Churchill would never have been Britain’s greatest Prime Minister and J.E.A Mills would not have served Jerry Rawlings as Vice President. Rawlings is known to have flunked his O-levels. Mills, though, was happy, in an eager and opportunistic manner, to have been plucked out of obscurity to become Vice President to such a man. He continues to seek the leadership of the nation on the platform of the party founded by a man whose education did not go far at all, to say the least.
Akufo-Addo, unlike Mills, never hesitated to stand up for freedom and a culture of respect for human rights during the long period of tyranny and dictatorship in Ghana. Not for him the cowardly retreat to the safety of academia when the rights of the people were being trampled upon. Not for him the acquiescence of a Vice President to “identification hair cuts” which were meted out to young men at the very seat of government, the Castle itself. Not for Akufo-Addo the scandal of the Quality Grain case-it was always curious that the Vice President, who authorised additional funds for the ill-fated project without lawful authorisation, did not stand with his cronies in the dock in that famous trial.
It would be pointless to waste further effort in replying to the tissue of lies which abound in the publication. The least said about the judgment rendered by the majority in the Supreme Court ruling on the Fast Track case the better. There are no lawyers of repute who support that perverse, politically procured judgment which was given in violation of basic principles of statutory interpretation. To use Nkrumah’s words, “it was bogus and fraudulent”. That was why the Supreme Court reviewed the judgment and set it aside.
The Ghanaian people are confronted with a clear choice on the 7th of December. They will decide to whom to entrust the health of our infant and growing democracy. Will they entrust it into the hands of a man who is unknown to the popular struggles of our time, unknown to the struggles for democracy and freedom? A man who preferred the sanctuary of the ivory tower to the principled fight for freedom? Or will they choose someone who at considerable risk to life and limb stood up courageously for what he believed to be right? Someone who has always been with the people in their fight for a better life? The answer will be known on 7th December.
Nana Akufo-Addo’s message is clear and simple. With the NPP and himself, Ghana can look forward to a further development of her democracy and the entrenchment of the rule of law in her society, to a rapid development and transformation of her national economy on a sustained basis and to the delivery of greater and greater social justice.
What is the alternative message? Sankofa? What? The old (P)NDC authoritarian culture and identification hair cuts? The free fall in the economy which we saw in 1999 and 2000, when Mills, as Vice President, was the helpless chair of the Economic Management Team? The sheer brazen corruption of those dark days which the majority of Ghanaians have sworn never to relive. There is no credible alternative.That is why Nana will win handsomely in December and Mills will go back finally to his ivory tower.
Nana is indeed the best man for the new Ghana.
mail: zakfuseini@gmail.com
