Let Mahama and Mahama spend their time in court

Recently, former President John Dramani Mahama has dared President Akufo-Addo to arrest him, instruct him and bring him to justice as well as any member of his family there. there is admissible evidence of the evidence that they accumulated wealth illegally during his tenure (See: "Take hold of me!" Mahama dare Nana, dailyguideafrica.com/ghanaweb.com, 24/03/2018).

If you remember, dear readers, at a secret meeting of the NDC in London somewhere last year, former President Mahama would have challenged President Akufo-Addo to resume his purported offshore properties (see Mahana) (see: Take back my "hotel" in Dubai – Mahama dares Akufo-Addo, kasapafmonline.com/ghanaweb.com, 21/03/2018).

In addition, former President Mahama would have thrown his cool into the heart: "Fortunately, they are now in power and I will urge them to sue us, as well as the first lady, if he is true that the company DKM belonged to us "(yen.com .gh).

Naturally, some of us would be considered political extremists, who maliciously seek to arouse discontent for constantly pointing out the injustices in the country that some observers perceive strangely as a trivial matter, but we must remain faithful to the faith, defend and defend the interests of society. good name of our beloved Ghana.

For a long time now, some of us have had a glimmer of suspicion of President Mahama's constant refusal to commit a wrongdoing while he is in office and any attempt to investigate him will fall into the wall. .

At the time, some of us were of the opinion that the Mahamas would probably voluntarily submit to an interrogation by the Special Prosecutor.

It is virtually certain that Ms. Mahama is not immune from prosecution, unlike Mr. Mahama, who, under the 1992 Ghanaian Constitution, is covered by the irrational indemnity clause.

That said, let Mr. and Mrs. Mahama rest badured that their wishes will come true.

We hope and pray that every suspect will have his day in the premises of the Special Prosecutor.

By honestly stating that without the abuse clause in the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, some of us would have preferred former President Mahama to appear before the Special Prosecutor and answer questions about the Ford Expedition Vehicle. , STX housing agreement, Brazilian planes. and the Armajaro scandal.

First of all, we would have demanded answers from former President Mahama, who had badly treated the STX housing contract, which was supposed to provide affordable housing to security agencies.

Despite the fact that the agreement did not materialize, the then vice president, Mahama, introduced us to a bill of more than $ 300 million.

Second, we would have filed a complaint with the Special Prosecutor to review the agreement relating to the Brazilian aircraft, if not the ridiculous compensation clause.

It will be remembered that in his speech on the state of the nation on 19^th In February 2009, the late President Mills informed Parliament that his government was reviewing the decision to acquire two presidential jet planes.

However, the late President Mills was somewhat ambivalent about the acquisition of the aircraft and thus observed: "Ghana simply can not afford the expenses at the moment and we certainly do not need two jet planes presidential elections "(thestatesmanonline.com, 16/06/2016).

Surprisingly, however, as the late Mills happily delivered his euphonic state of the nation address to Parliament, Vice President John Mahama, also Chairman of the Armed Forces Council, happily entertained Brazilian delegations and negotiated with diligence. . the acquisition of five jets, including the most expensive hangar unbeknownst to the late President Mills.

Unsurprisingly, therefore, the late President Mills is wary of the deal as a whole and has decided to form a committee to review the agreement, according to Martin Amidu, former Attorney General of the President. Mills.

According to the wisdom of the drafters of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the inclusion of the controversial indemnity clause was intended to "leave the sleeping dogs to their beds" and to continue our life.

Despite the general outcry over the compensation clause, Professor Albert K. Fiadjoe, chairman of the Constitutional Review Commission (CRC), insisted that the removal of the controversial clause from the Constitution of 1992 would lead to anarchy in the country.

"This means that all governments since 1966 are illegal, that we must immediately cede the reign of government to the People's Party of the Convention. We will criminalize all those who have participated in governments since the overthrow of the first republic and also cause useless interruptions in society. national affairs.

"The removal of allowances could have a negative impact on the democratic dispensation, as it would give the negative impression that the country is abandoning a settlement it has previously accepted.

"This could seriously undermine the stability of the country (Source: graphic.com.gh, 2012)."

Insofar as the grounds for retention of the indemnity clause retained by the CRC are valid, there is no reason for corrupt public officials to retain all allegedly stolen funds.

In fact, contrary to CRC's position on the controversial indemnity clause, it will still be unfair, inconceivable and inconvenient not to change the unpopular compensation clause to allow us to recover stolen funds from greedy officials.

For me, the constitution of Ghana needs to be further reviewed and irrational clauses such as the indemnity clause are either modified or deleted accordingly.

How on earth can individuals commit unforgivable crimes (gigantic beating and corruption) against the state and get away with their misdeeds?

And more, the traditional exemption of heads of state prosecutions despite the evidence invoked to answer is wrong.

How serious are we as a country when we can only go down heavily on the goat, cbadava and plantain thieves and let down the criminals who constantly plunge into the national coffers as if tomorrow would not come?

Elsewhere, however, past and present state leaders may face laws without any recourse to their status.

For example, recently, the controversial South Korean President, Park Geun-hye, was found in a vast scandal of corruption and cronyism, which led to her dismissal in March 2017.

And more recently, former Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva, cited as the most famous president of Brazil's contemporary history, was sentenced to nine years and six months in prison after being found guilty corruption and money laundering. (Source: guardian.co.uk, 12/07/2017).

We could surely do better. So let us do it. Modify or eliminate irrational laws to replace them with innovative and timely laws.

K. Badu, United Kingdom.
[email protected]