Despite the furore caused by the opposition about what it would mean for non-indigenous community in that Latin American country, it has proved useful in testing the public pulse about the issue.
In 2005, when I asked then-Minister of Communications Professor Mike Ocquaye whether he would put the
question of Ghana's decision to liberalise downstream petroleum sector, he answered in the negative [see below:
]
When I asked him whether in his heart of hearts, he felt deregulation was a good thing, his first statement was sufficient to capture where he was going with the argument: “definitely”, he said, “it’s a good thing”. His basic premise was that if you have debt forgiveness—such as that provided by the German government very recently – what other option was there than to deregulate.
As to whether he would take the issue of deregulation to a referendum, he stated quite expressly that “this is not a matter of a referendum.” He continued that “this is a matter of public policy formulation”. Then, I wondered, why was civil society there? He claimed that the government was “gathering as many thoughts as possible” before submitting them to Cabinet and Parliament. At least, he assured me, “government has a direction”. Then he proceeded to direct the “blame” of deregulation process on the previous administration whilst contemporaneously adding that it would “be accepted by the people of Ghana”.
In Ghana, we make a lot of noise about being the paragaon of what one might call "electoral virtue"--yet in the almost-five years of being back home in Ghana, no government has had the temerity of calling a referendum.
I hope President Mills will be an exception!
7 comments:
Well, the constitution is the supreme law, and it gives certain powers to certain bodies where it seems fit. It also prescribes a referendum where it sees fit. You post seems, suspiciously, to say that let's put any number of things to a referendum. We do not want to vulgarise our constitution and the machinery of a referendum, do we? So, if there was a definite view in your post, then I disagree with it.
Nana Yaw--I think you would know best; it's good to be enlightened! SO, does it mean than not every major policy needs go the referendum way? I see what you mean, then, about bodies--mostly regulatory ones--that have been empowered...
It just struck me then that in the case of the Ghana Telecom furore last year, clearly, the NCA was toothless in responding to the most-inept way in which the bill was passed.
Given the divisiveness, coud it have warranted a referendum?
(btw, have u checked out my critiquing-regionalism.org site yet? Your legal mind could bring insights to bear on my commentary of the dynamics?
Well, Emmanuel, seeing that referenda are very expensive elections (albeit elections between issues and not persons) they are not treated lightly under the constitution. Some of the very significant changes which cannot be effected without referenda are
1. The creation/alteration of boundaries/territory e.g. regions;
2. Human Rights Provisions;
3. Freedom of the Media;
4. The Executive;
5. The Legislature;
6. The Judiciary;
7. CHRAJ;
8. NCCE;
9. The Armed Forces;
10. The Police;
11. Chieftaincy;
12. Finance provisions;
13. Local Government;
14. Code of Conduct for Public Officers.
(Remember the list is not full)
Nana Yaw--many thanks for these deep insights--ever thought about having a segment on your blog on demystifying the law for we mere mortals?:-D
We're all mere mortals. I have a blog in the works (mentally) about everyday law. just not got the extra push to outdoor it.
well, you've got one push from me already! it's like me--working on my crime thriller: the characters and plot is set, but getting down to FINISH it is taking me SO bloody long!(since 2006!!)
Dont know much about constitutional law, but I think it would be a good thing if we could at least put some important issues to referendum.
I know for a fact that the Swiss do a referendum at least once every year-they had one in early Feb and one last quarter of last year and they voted on issues such as naturalisation and free movement of goods etc.etc.
However considering the cost of elections it would be difficult to follow this trend.Maybe we could combine these referendums with upcoming district elections/parliamentary elections whichever is closer. What I don't know is how we are going to decide which issues will go to the national vote
Post a Comment