Africans before the arrival of the Europeans were
being ruled by their own chiefs. The chiefs as the custodians of the culture
maintained law and order among their subjects. Undeniably the emergence of the
colonial rule has resorted to much aspects of governance being engaged with the
colonial masters as heads of governance.
To re-empower the tradit
ional system into governance a great deal of
concerns are being ignited by the national house of chiefs into the
constitution review activities calling for the creation of a second chamber
inside parliament for them.
While some resonate to this cry adding it would
enable the people to be more in a straight line with policy making others seems
to be disputing their assertions.
The CRC rejected the proposal and instead
recommended that bills be referred to the national house of chiefs for their
input before parliament passes them into law.
But some chiefs have vowed to exploit remaining
avenues in the review process for the inclusion of the second chamber so they
can directly participate in the governance of the country.
Chief as a ruler of the people is not expected to
announce his political affiliation. It is without an iota of doubt that
politicians are busy buccaneering to harvest votes from the people and to help
achieve their aim they resort to buy the interest of the people at the root
through traditional rulers.
This unfortunately has created a world where some
chiefs are openly declaring their political stands; one would ask how the
situation would be creating a chamber for them under the same roof with the
politicians. This reminds me of a story of a captive falling in love with its
captor. This is a sure way of our chiefs seeking to the political field of attraction;
if a political group is aware that the enactment of a law depends on support
from the second chamber, he would do anything to influence members of that
chamber. This is a clear indication of the involvement of our chiefs into
politics which should not have been so. One thing that would also raise
eyebrows has to do with the eligibility; on which criteria would a chief be
qualified to be part of this chamber?
While the chiefs are busy struggling to get on the
field of politics, their wives; queen mothers are back home banging at the door
gruelling to be part of the house. They believe their womanly roles are needed
in the houses of their chiefs.
A gender advocate Angela Dwamena Aboagye has also
mounted a strong argument against a proposal for the creation of a second
chamber of parliament for chiefs and however, insists the all male house of
chiefs accept queen mothers into their fold. This also brings to bear the issue
of gender equality. Anytime trenchant are heard over women footing with men,
those voices are seem to be coming from the west. But some interesting
characteristics of culture is it viability to change and its dynamism. My hope
is that one day those characteristics would be exhibited in these houses.
Would the queens slowly walk into the house while
their husbands struggle to make their way into parliament leaving their door
ajar? Or they would also redirect their movement as they warm up along the
touch line to join their husbands in their new field of play?
With Ghana’s democracy at its bud stage, are we
really ready for a second chamber?
No comments:
Post a Comment