|
|
The downgrading of a titan, Mr. Kwame Pianim
E. Ablorh-Odjidja,
Ghanadot
Regrettable, some Ghanaian personalities do undercut their
endurance as statesmen. It is difficult for this writer to say
this about Mr. Kwame Pianim. He will admit that saying so is a
value laden judgment, but how else could one respond to a charge
based on the evidence of “two brown envelopes,” which is even
more value laden?.
Mr. Pianim has said, according to the media, “that President
Mills would not steal form Ghanaians.” This is good news because
it expresses confidence in our current president. Ideally, we do
not expect our presidents to steal.
The problem for Mr. Pianim is the reasonableness in his “brown
envelopes” assertion, the premise of which cannot be sustained
under the scrutiny of logic.
According to Mr. Pianim, he had seen President Mills, on at least
two occasions, return “two brown envelopes to where they
belonged.” He inferred that this was something that he never saw
under the two former presidents, Kufuor and Rawlings.
At best, this charge is very circumstantial. At worse, the
assertion creates the perception that the two former presidents
were stealing from Ghanaians. Doubtlessly, the charge is unfair
to the two presidents. But the damage this creates for the image
of Ghana is unwarranted, at least, based on the very weak
premise of the assertion.
There would be the temptation for some to think that because Mr.
Pianim has become a “whistle blower,.” so to speak, on the
political establishments of the two preceding presidents,. Mr.
Pianim has, therefore, become the target of gratuitous attacks.
But, it should not be overlooked that with this “brown envelope”
assertion, Mr. Pianimn, a man with such a renowned reputation,
has also done a greater disservice to himself.
He is considered an intellectual titan in the books of many. He
is a renowned economist, a scholar, and a man who has been held
high above the usual political temperament of the land. Even
Ghanaians who are themselves achievers in international circles
have been quick to cite his reputation as a man of worth and
probity.
Mr. Pianim was once regarded as political martyr to what many
thought was a vicious political system in the 80s. And then this
sheer flippant judgment based on the content of a “brown
envelope.”
Mr. Pianim should have known that he did not see the total value
or worth of the content. Or was this shown to him? That he saw
“two brown envelopes” does not explain the reason why he was
there, or privileged, to see the transaction.
An envelope of bribe was offered to a president in his presence,
assuming that happened. But did he expect the president to
accept it then and there? More important, did this refusal
negate the probability that another bribe offered to the same
person, in the absence of Mr. Pianim, could not have been
accepted?
To return to what was in the envelope; did his presence cause it
to be returned or was it because the amount was too small?
A categorical statement from Mr. Pianim about the worthiness of
President Mills alone, without the premise offered, would have
been enough, based on Mr. Pianim's reputation. He would have done
President Atta Mills a lot of good; but not with this assertion.
This writer has no knowledge of the integrity or lack thereof of
President Mills. One would expect our presidents to be men of
integrity and therefore deserving of the benefit of doubt for
their probity and worthiness. President Atta Mills deserves this
opinion from all Ghanaians.
But, should there be a need to challenge the integrity of
President Atta Mills in the future, or that of ex-presidents
Kufuor or Rawlings, that need should be based on something more
substantial than this “brown envelopes” assertion. Ghana would
be better off for this stance.
E.
Ablorh-Odjidja, Publisher
www.ghanadot.com, Washington, DC, December 8, 2009.
Permission to publish: Please feel free to publish or
reproduce, with credits, unedited. If posted at a website,
email a copy of the web page to
publisher@ghanadot.com . Or don't publish at all.
|
