The good book tells us in 1 Corinthians. 10:23 that all things are permissible, but not all things are beneficial or constructive. We are a country too far back to hold ourselves back from constructive engagements and the pursuit of progress.
The last few weeks have seen our airwaves and political discourse dominated by claims,counterclaims, accusations and threats over suspicions around an air ambulance carriage of drugs and currency. This discourse has been at the expense of discourse on strong policy and pressing public interest matters like Galamsey, the Bawku conflict, the lack of water in our Cape Coast schools etc. I look back and ask whether the debate was worth it?
• Of Truth-My Truth
I have spent some time engaging practically every relevant party to ascertain the truth of the issue. For the most part, there is consensus. The fight against illicit drugs and money laundering is a global enterprise. No one country can win it alone. It requires collaboration. That’s why countries share intelligence, training and even provide technical and logistical support to less endowed countries.
All aircrafts, especially the private ones, undergo routine checks but when intelligence is picked, receiving countries are bound by international conventions and agreements to scrutinize such aircrafts immediately upon arrival.
The Air Med flight arrived in Ghana, in transit, prior tagged as a suspicious flight by international drug agencies. Whether due to its flight path through countries with perverse reputation forbeing transit points for drugs or some other intelligence, it was tagged for our local agencies to monitor, scrutinize and report on.
Our agencies acted swiftly on the intelligence and conducted a thorough search on the said aircraft on landing. There was no evidence of illicit drugs nor currencies.
• Of Errors
The fight against drugs and money laundering is an extremely intelligence sensitive process. It is complex and fought collaboratively with other international partners. Its complexity and sensitivity is such that, a country may wilfully have to lead drug traffickers on, in what is called ‘CONTROLLED DELIVERY’ – meaning a country may be aware of the presence of drugs but will allow the flight to carry on.
This helps international enforcement agencies expose the wider drug ring as they nab them at alternate destinations.For this and other reasons, intelligence or leads that officers of the State may receive must be managed carefully.
There is no denying that Hon. Ntim Fordjour (The Priest) gained access to some legitimate intelligence of the flight being tagged as suspicious. He is an officer of the State and earmarked as a recipient of whistleblower information under Section 3 (1)(f) of the whistleblower Act, ACT720 (2006). No wrong here. However, knowing the sensitivity of the information and more importantly, the incompleteness of the information, the decision to go public prematurely, was wrong.
The right to freedom of speech is a guaranteed and fundamental human right under Article 21of the 1992 Constitution. That right is however not an absolute right. Article 12(2) subjects all fundamental human rights to respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for the public interest. To be clear, and in relation to our subject matter, this clause places a limitation on the right to freedom of speech in-so-far as the exercise of that right will undermine the public interest.
The public interest is not furthered by incomplete information which tends to unjustifiably stain the image of our country as a drug and money laundering hub.
The Priest is the ranking member of Parliament’s Defence and Interior committee with oversight over the security services responsible for port security and narcotics control. He, through his Chair, has powers to summon the relevant security heads to further interrogate the intelligence he had received. He sure would have realised that there were no such drugs or currency.
Imagine that in this instance, the suspicious activity was part of an international enforcement agency coordinated operation. Going public could have blown the operation and further dented Ghana’s competency in coordinating with international agencies. That would have been disastrous.
Cuing from 1 Corinthians 10:23, while it may be permissible to entertain or share a suspicion, his deeds were not constructive nor beneficial to the broader policy and public good. It may not have been intended, but he got it wrong. Lessons learned.
• Of Communication Errors
The President’s statement that he took the allegations seriously and directing the immediate investigation was well toned and on point. It wasn’t dismissive, it was forward looking and a good thing. I commend him.
With a presidential directive commissioning an investigation, it was improper for any agency of State to seek to share details to disprove the allegations by the Priest. I identify with the temptation to speak, especially when the whole government was unjustifiably being called a ‘Cocaine’ Government. But, while it may not have been intended, such interventions prejudice investigations and more importantly, create unnecessary doubt in the outcome of an honest investigation. Lessons also learned.
• Of Further Errors
Article 41(i) of the 1992 constitution enjoins us as citizens and as part of our duties to “co- operate with lawful agencies in the maintenance of law and order”. The Priest cannot on one hand share sensitive intelligence in public and, on the other, refuse to cooperate with the publicly announced investigation.
Having said that, what purpose did it serve to storm the house of the Priest with mask wearing,arms wielding, tactically clothed security officers? Putting the fear of god in a citizen over speech? We are past that stage as a democracy. It is sure not reflective of the posturing of H.E. the President nor the expectations of a contemporary democracy.
The vigilante act of other citizens seeking to stop or obstruct the purported arrest of the Priest by a legitimate officer of the police was illegal, wrong and an act punishable by law. According to the Criminal and other offenses (Procedure) Act, ACT30 (1960), a police officer can at any time arrest anyone on reasonable suspicion of having committed or about to commit a crime. The law, in the same vein bars anyone from interfering with an arrest by a Police Officer.
• Of Praise
The recent drug and fake currency busts of over half a billion dollars by our security agencies should give us hope that our forces are up and doing. The evidence does not support any suggestion that we are a cocaine country nor have a cocaine government. Let us encourage our servicemen and criticize constructively. In this respect, I am proud of Brigadier Gen. Mantey, Charles Kipo, Bashiru Dapilah and their teams. Cheerio on.
• Of Concluding Errors
We let the narrowness of our politics to let one wrong beget the other and reflect on us as citizens of a Banana Republic.
• Of Concluding Truths
We are not a Banana Republic, and our politicians must lead the way by respecting and living by our laws and the ethics of the privileged roles we entrust them with. Our politics must know the ‘whens’ and ‘hows’ and not lose sight of what matters.
• Of Verdict
The debate was not worth it. It was an unconstructive distraction. Let’s get back to fighting and talking GALAMSEY and the true things that matter and shape our future.
For all things are politics-able but not all things are Ghana-ble.
