The moment human interference is allowed to disrupt the tenets of the law, state social cohesion begins to suffer… mansa musa writes ✍️
From the very beginning of the ORAL operations targeting suspected corrupt politicians and public officials of the previous administration, a politically organized pushback emerged. This resistance quickly escalated into furious public skirmishes. Some members of the defeated NPP party even warned the new NDC administration, led by John Dramani Mahama, that if the government pursued the ORAL anti-corruption programme strictly and without compromise, the country would not know peace. They threatened that the opposition, some of whom have clearly been cited in corruption-related practices would ensure the failure of the new government.
As a result of this, along with backdoor interventions from some prominent figures within the state, a tacit violation of the rule of law has occurred. This has forced the Mahama administration to relent. The government has, to a large extent, succumbed to opposing pressures, causing the ORAL movement and its momentum to grind to an uncomfortable, disgraceful, and embarrassing halt.
In trying to appease or placate reactionary forces in the hope of creating a tranquil environment for governance, the administration risks repeating historical mistakes. As history has often shown, failure to appreciate the modus operandi of the UP tradition may lead to regret. Trusting, fraternizing, and engaging too closely with such forces may ultimately prove counterproductive, akin to “rubbing one’s nose against the head of a live viper”, hardly a wise strategy.
Currently, there are both overt and covert acts of sabotage occurring across various institutions and sectors, rendering the ruling authorities nearly powerless. President Mahama and his administration must recognize that governing through appeasement rarely leads to success. The rule of law requires that legal processes be allowed to function naturally, without interference.
The dynamics of the law are clear: it can punish or absolve, incarcerate or release. Once human interference disrupts its course, the foundations of social cohesion are weakened. This is not conjecture, it is a fundamental principle that must be respected. Without strict adherence to the rule of law, institutions such as the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) risk becoming mere talking shops, where discussions circle endlessly with little tangible outcome.
The PAC includes capable and serious individuals, the MP from Navrongo, the MP from Fanteland, and the MP from the Volta Region who engage meaningfully in proceedings. However, concerns arise regarding the inclusion of the MP from Asante land. What exactly is her role on the committee? At the very least, Ghanaians deserve to know whether she has been investigated or cleared regarding her involvement in the economic challenges faced during her tenure.
Having served as deputy to former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta, who is now reportedly facing extradition to Ghana to answer for issues related to economic management, her presence on the committee raises valid questions. PAC sessions are meant to uphold accountability. For someone who was part of the financial leadership during that period to now interrogate others on similar matters raises concerns about consistency and credibility.
Is this not, in itself, a contradiction, a potential mockery of public administrative processes? The PAC must clarify to Ghanaians whether she has been cleared of any involvement in the economic downturn experienced under the Akufo-Addo/Bawumia administration. Such transparency is necessary to restore public confidence and ensure the PAC is not perceived as an ineffective body, but rather as a credible institution committed to accountability.
