In January 2015, the Accra Metropolitan Assembly (AMA) pulled down some billboards the two major Nigerian political parties had legally rented and paid for. This unfortunate action was after a few Ghanaians cried foul over the billboards. The deed is done, and the harm to Ghana's relationship to Nigeria is already done, but I think Ghanaian officials should learn to act responsibly for once. Let's examine some of the reasons given for objecting to Nigerian political parties mounting billboards in Ghana.
In an awkward stance, the New Patriotic Party (NPP) Member of Parliament (MP) for Assin Central, Kennedy Agyapong, complained of a "possible annexation" of Ghana by Nigeria as a result of the giant billboards erected by the two major political parties of Nigeria. This is a laughable claim; very laughable because a country cannot be annexed through billboards. If Kennedy Agyapong, and for that matter any Ghanaian, fears that Nigeria will annex Ghana, then he should be concerned about the millions of Nigerians living in Ghana. Countries are annexed by human beings, not through billboards.
Vladimir Antwi-Danso, a senior fellow at the Legon Centre for International Affairs and Diplomacy (LECIAD), described the mounting of Nigerian billboards in Ghana as a security threat to Ghana. He stated, "since the relationship between some former leaders in Ghana and Nigeria are not too warm, allowing the mounting of billboards could have dire consequences, not just on the international scene, but in local politics." Unfortunately, he did not mention which past leaders don't have warm relationships. Now, even if that is true, should Ghana base its current relationship with Nigeria on the relationships between individuals, past presidents or otherwise? Vladimir Antwi-Danso went on to say that the billboards pose a security threat to the nation because the turf war in Nigeria could be imported into the country. If the millions of Nigerians living in Ghana did not import the so-called turf war to Ghana, how could billboards do that?
Vladimir Antwi-Danso lamented that if there is the perception that Ghana is supporting one candidate over the other, then the relationship between Ghana and Nigeria after the elections will be marred. He went on, "What if after the elections the scales change, then the relationship between our country and Nigeria will also have some hiccups." It appears this man does not know that the billboards were of the Nigerian presidential candidate, General Mohammed Buhari and the incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan. Nigeria's election would be won by Jonathan or Buhari, and both of them were given access to put up billboards in Ghana so how is Ghana supporting one candidate over the other? And did Ghana pay for the billboards for anybody to draw the conclusion Vladimir Antwi-Danso came to?
Vladimir Antwi Danso over-extended his reach when he called for the dismissal of the persons who authorized the posting of the billboards saying, "I think heads should roll over how the thing came here because somebody might have taken money." Vladimir Antwi Danso should remember that most billboards in Accra are privately owned, and the owners pay fees or tariffs to the Accra Metropolitan Assembly. Secondly, there is no law that forbids foreign entities from advertising in Ghana. The Nigerians duly paid for the billboards according to appropriate rules and laws of Ghana. Vladimir Antwi Danso call is purely a scare-crow tactic which does not fly anymore for even birds in the fields or farms. Thus, the billboards did not contravene the laws of Ghana. In fact the owners of the billboards should sue AMA for the lost revenue.
When the billboards were pulled down, Kwesi Annin (dubbed security expert) hailed the act and noted that Ghana has been saved from a possible attack by terrorist group, Boko Haram. According to Kwesi Annin, political elites in the country [Ghana] could have been targeted by Boko Haram if the political campaign in Ghana was not stopped. I wonder how he came to that conclusion. Maybe he is an insider. Otherwise, how would he know the intended targets of Boko Haram? By the way, Boko Haram has attacked targets in Cameroon and Chad even though Nigerians have not campaigned or put up billboards in those countries so obviously billboards do not determine the targets of Boko Haram.
Kwesi Annin went on, "I think it is critical that National Security and Accra Metropolitan Assembly have listened to the concerns and voices raised by ordinary citizens that these billboards and some level of active political engagement might pose potential threat in the future." By that, Kwesi Annin is encouraging Ghana to prevent foreigners from engaging in political activities in the country. Why does Kwesi Annin think that Ghanaians could engage in political activities in other countries, but others cannot engage in political activities in Ghana? The last time I checked there was NPP Toronto branch, NDC New York branch, etc. Recently, some Ghanaians protested openly when the President of Ghana visited some other countries. Ghanaians have formed political associations in several countries around the world and they engage in political activities including fundraising for political parties in Ghana. For people like Kwesi Annin, Ghanaians have the right to be political in other countries, but Ghana should not be grounds for political activities by foreigners living in Ghana. What will Kwesi Annin advise the National Security to do if some Nigerians living in Ghana call a meeting along political affiliations? Ask the National Security to arrest them?
Generally, the call to destroy what the Nigerians duly paid for is nothing but sensational, baseless, shouting wolf when there is no wolf, and xenophobic.
Kwaku Obosu-Mensah
komensah@hotmail.com
