<<Print>>

Perhaps never in contemporary politics has negative campaigning been made the main course for what is turning out to be an entire duration of a ruling party�s tenure. Negative campaigning usually has the knack to backfire if it is insincere or hypocritical. For negative campaigning to be effective it must have a short lifespan which gives the target very little time to recover, and campaign strategists believe the best time for a political party to go all-out dirty is in the last couple of months in the run up to an election. The reason is simple: negative campaigning normally targets undecided voters who are yet to make up their minds over a political choice, as it is a powerful medium to sway the minds of these voters to your side or against you, when you are the target. Going negative and staying mostly negative is allowable when taking on an incumbent. However, the rules have been overturned in Ghana. Over the last two years, at least, the ruling party here has been engaged in mudslinging and succeeded in putting the opposition on the defensive much of the time. Unfortunately for the government, it has not stopped the opposition from speaking loudly on issues and exposing the flaws and failures in government policies. It is all too clear to Ghanaians that the governing National Democratic Congress (NDC) has a very straightforward communications strategy when it comes to addressing Ghanaians through the mass media: attack, attack and attack Nana Akufo-Addo, the 2012 presidential candidate of the NPP. Attack him, attack his family and attack his party. A similar scenario panned out in Zambia just last month. It is useful to trace the political history of Zambia which shares some characteristics with Ghana. Kenneth Kaunda ruled as head of state of Zambia for 27 years before the advent of multi-party democracy in 1991, just around the time that Jerry Rawlings� 11-year-rule in Ghana was going through its own democratic metamorphosis. Frederick Chiluba, for two terms, ruled Zambia as the first democratically elected President from 1991 to 2002; Jerry Rawlings did the same from 1992 to 2000. After successfully completing his two terms in office, Frederick Chiluba was replaced by Levy Mwanawasa, who ruled from 2002 to 2008. He died in August 2008, and per the Zambian constitution it forced an election in October 2008. President Kufuor replaced Rawlings in 2000 and also ruled for two terms. A couple of weeks ago, Michael Sata was elected President of Zambia after defeating President Rupiah Banda. President Banda broke a record in the South African Development Community as the first elected head of state to have been in office for the shortest period of time. He also holds the record as the first one-term president of Zambia. Mr Sata was rejected by Zambians in the past but his message did not change. His message of economic transformation and empowerment to provide jobs for the growing number of unemployed youth in Zambia was repeated in this year�s election. He emerged victorious with a margin of over 188,000 votes and his party, the Patriotic Front, secured a majority in the National Assembly. It was sweet revenge for him, having lost narrowly to Mr Banda by only 35,000 votes in the 2008 presidential by-election occasioned by the mid-term death of Levy Mwanawasa. Political arrogance and economic hardship could be a summary of the reasons as to why Rupiah Banda did not have his chance to have a full term in office. Interfering with the judiciary, shipwrecked fight against corruption, the perception of mining companies extracting huge profits without any benefit to the local people, government�s failure to make good electoral promises, massive and widespread youth unemployment, contracting of $6 billion worth of Chinese loans took place in a matter of two years. Banda�s communicators were also known for their ruthless attacks on his main opponent, Sata. The hostility and character assassination were so vile that Michael Sata was renamed Michael �Satan� by activists of Rupiah Banda through vicious attacks in the public media. President Banda simply did not listen to the cry of his people. He was seen as weak and ineffective. We are faced with similar scenario in Ghana and yet the government of President Mills is refusing to listen. The celebrations that erupted in the streets of Zambia after Mr Michael Sata was declared winner of last week�s presidential elections were those of a nation staying true to the founding principles of democratic governance, where the authority and right to govern are determined by the collective will of the people as expressed through elections. The message from Zambia is that a second term is not an entitlement but the prerogative of the electorate based on their assessment of your performance. As Ghana gears up for election next year, we should reflect on the actions of the electorate in Zambia and we must also not lose sight of the happenings at the International Criminal Court regarding the prosecution of state officials for post-electoral violence. Again, just this week, we have been informed that the ICC at the Hague is commencing investigations into the post-electoral violence that erupted in the aftermath of the Ivorian elections after Laurent Gbagbo refused to hand over power to Alassane Ouattara after the former had lost the 2010 elections. The National Chairman of the New Patriotic Party was right in pointing out on Oman FM yesterday that Ghana has no superior predisposition to the people of Kenya or, even more poignantly Cote d�Ivoire. Indeed, we share ethnic background with the people next door. So, let us not kid ourselves into thinking that we are of a unique breed. The facts from the Kenyan experience give clear caution to state officials here. Six officials who supported the main protagonists in the 2008 elections, i.e. President Mwai Kibaki and now Prime Minister Raila Odinga, are currently facing trial for their actions and inactions that led to the lost of over 1,300 lives. A group that was marshalled by the government to visit mayhem on the citizenry of Kenya was the Mungiki. This group has been described as a �politically motivated gang of youth. It�s more like an army unit.� In Ghana, the Mungiki could be likened to NDC foot-soldiers, Azorka boys or the yet-to-be-seen Bamba Boys; but that is not to suggest that any of the two Ghanaian partisan groups mentioned above have done anything close to what the world witnessed in what was peaceful Kenya. You may call them organised foot-soldiers. The chief commissioner of the Kenyan police (IGP in Ghana) is accused of having ordered the police to turn a blind eye to the murderous activities of the Mungiki. The foot-soldiers of the Kenyan ruling party in 2007 were allegedly provided military gear for their operations upon the directive of the then Commissioner of Police, Hussein Ali. Current Minister of Finance and a 2012 Kenyan presidential hopeful, Uhuru Kenyatta, has been charged for funding this group to the tune of millions of Kenyan shillings. The message here is that not even their political paymasters are safe. What this should tell our politicians is that the person who may sign the cheque for groups such as Azorka Boys or Bamba Boys to go on rampage may one day have the book thrown at them, likewise the head of police who turns a blind eye to the actions of these hoodlums in his bid to please his political masters. What is refreshing is that the International Criminal Court will help encourage a new rule, a rule that says leaders cannot commit atrocities to gain power. My only reservation is that this culture against impunity is not being established through an African Criminal Court. Nevertheless, the last time I checked, the distance from Accra to Amsterdam was 5,230 kilometres whilst that of Nairobi to Amsterdam was 6,659 kilometres. What it tells us is that the path to The Hague is even shorter from Accra than from Nairobi and not that different from Abidjan.