|
|
|
|
|
 |
All Hands on Deck
Professor S. Kwaku Asare
I recently had the audacity to ask a highly respected public
official why, under our laws, a Ghanaian (born and educated in
Ghana) who holds the citizenship of another country, cannot be
the Chief Fire Officer. To my utter shock and chagrin, he
responded by saying“if the British Embassy and Castle are on
Fire, a Chief Fire Officer who is both British and Ghanaian
would be conflicted as to which fire to put out.”Similarly,
when the Attorney General was invited by the Supreme Court to
explain why dual citizens are banned from holding certain
public offices, the best answer he could provide was “The
issue of citizenship also borders on issues of loyalty and
fidelity. I am inviting this Honourable Court to ponder over
these two hypothetical cases. How can the loyalty of say a
Colonel in the Ghanaian Army be guaranteed if there is a war
between Ghana and Nigeria and the said colonel holds both
citizenship of Ghana and Nigeria? How can one be sure of the
commitment and loyalty of Ghanaian High Commissioner to UK if
there is a diplomatic row between Ghana and UK when the same
Ghanaian High Commissioner holds a British citizenship as
well?”
That is it! On some imagined and unreasonable fear of
disloyalty and infidelity, we have excluded thousands of our
own citizens from serving as Members of Parliament (MP);
Justices of the Supreme Court; Minister; Ambassador; Secretary
to the Cabinet; Chief of Defense Staff or any Service Chief;
Inspector General of Police; Commissioner of CEPS; Director of
Immigration; Commisioner of VAT; Director-General of Prisons
Service; Chief Fire Officer; Chief Director of a Ministry; and
rank of a Colonel in the Army or its equivalent in the other
security services. But that is not all. Dual citizens can be
excluded from holding any other public office that the
Minister may by legislative instrument prescribe!
With this quality of reasoning, one wonders why dual citizens
are allowed to play for the Black Stars. I am inviting the
Honourable Readers to ponder over these two hypothetical
cases. How can the loyalty of say a Striker in the Ghana Black
Stars be guaranteed if there is a match between Ghana and
Germany and the said Striker holds both citizenship of Ghana
and Germany? How can one be sure of the commitment and loyalty
of a Ghanaian Goalkeeper if there is a penalty shoot out
between Ghana and UK when the same Ghanaian Goalkeeper holds a
British citizenship as well?
Of course, we all know that Kevin Prince Boateng not only
played for the Black Stars in the 2010 World Cup, he was one
of our better players when the Black Stars played against
Germany. That should be the answer for those who invoke this
disloyalty and infidelity argument, assuming that the argument
is a serious and sincere one.
What does it mean to say you are a citizen of Ghana? The
Constitution addresses citizenship from two perspectives: In
chapter 3, it focuses on citizenship as status and delineates
who is a Ghanaian citizen. In chapter 7, it focuses on
citizenship as a bundle of rights and delineates the rights
that accrue to only and all citizens.
In Chapter 3, the Constitution stipulates the various ways
that one can become a Ghanaian. These include grandfathered
citizenship (those who were citizens before 1992), blood
citizenship (anyone born anywhere to at least one Ghanaian
citizen), child citizenship (children who are less than 8
years and found in Ghana or less than 16 years and adopted)
and marriage citizenship (anyone married to a Ghanaian can
apply to become a citizen).
In Chapter 7, the Constitution stipulates that citizens have
the unfettered right to vote. This right has several
derivative rights, including the right to be registered, the
right to participate fully and equally in the political
process, the right to cast a ballot, the right for the ballot
to be counted, the right for the ballot to be weighed equally,
the right to run for elected office, the right to hold
unelected public office, and the right to finance a candidate
for elections.
Thus, we the people of Ghana reject a Caste system that varies
a citizen’s rights based on social, economic, political,
religious, ethnic, resident, or other citizenship status. In
effect, whatever their inequalities of wealth, status, and
power in the everyday activities of civil society; citizenship
gives everyone the same status as peers in the political
public. This is the concept of equal citizenship.
To say that you are a Ghanaian means not only do you have
status but that you have rights that non-Ghanaians cannot
enjoy. If you do not have these rights, then it is empty to
say you are a Ghanaian.
Unfortunately, the aforementioned exclusions, create a new
class of of citizenship: dual and unequal citizens. This class
of citizens are not allowed to participate in the political
process. They cannot belong to the legislature. They cannot
serve on the highest court of the land. They cannot belong to
the executive. While they are “citizens,” they lack the rights
that inure to “true citizens.” They are told, in very plain
language, that they are disloyal and infidel and cannot
partake in serious governance matters. These exclusions are
antithetical to the structure and spirit of the Constitution,
which endows all citizens with the same and equal rights.
As a condition precedent to holding these “excluded offices,”
dual citizens are told to renounce their other citizenship, a
requirement that is unduly harsh, unreasonable and serves no
legitimate purpose. It is a tad naïve to assume that a
disloyal infidel will suddenly become loyal and faithful
merely because of some administrative procedure (renounciation).
Moreover, the “excluded offices” are elective or appointive
and the electors and appointors can properly incorporate any
effect of dual citizenship in their voting and appointing
decisions. That is, let the voters and the appointor decide
whether to hire these dual citizens. Whatever irritanioal
fears exist about dual citizens can be addressed by asking
them to take a special oath of office.
The exclusions are also irrational because dual citizens have
served and can serve at the office of the Presidency,
including serving as Chief of Staff and Deputy Chief of Staff.
I am reliably informed that Alex Segbefia is a dual citizen
but he serves as Deputy Chief of Staff. In Kuffuor’s
adminsitration, the late Daniel Agyeman served as a legal
counsellor at the Presidency. If dual citizens can serve as
Chief of Staff of the President, which arguably is one of the
most powerful positions in the country, then it is
unfathomable and irrational to exclude them from serving in
positions, such as Chief Fire Officer or as elected Members of
Parliament. Most ministers are nominated and screened by the
Chief of Staff. When they are confirmed by Parliament, their
access to the Presidency is via the Chief of Staff. Yet, the
Chef of Staff, were he a dual citizen, would be disqualified
from being a minister. There is no logic to this!
Further, the requirement that dual citizens renounce their
other citizenships is discriminatory and disproportional. It
is discriminatory because it requires dual citizens to give up
both their citizenship of and residence in the non-Ghanaian
country while permanent residents do not give up their
residence when they opt to serve Ghana. That is, renouncing
their citizenships as a condition precedent to serving forces
dual citizens to give up their residence as well. It is also
discriminatory in treating dual citizens differntly from
single citizens.
The exclusions devalue the dignity of dual citizens as they
are treated as infidels and disloyal citizens in their own
country. Further, they are punished (by being excluded from
these offices) on a mere suspicion, contrary to our cherished
principle of giving every person their day in court.
Dual citizens, as citizens of this country, have interests and
have a fundamental right to fully engage in the political
process, including the ability to serve in all elected and
appointed public offices. If we do not think dual citizens are
worthy of serving because we have questions about their
loyalty and fidelity then the appropriate response is to take
away their citizenships not to create a society of unequal
citizens.
Dual citizens support the national economy with their
remittances. In 2010, remittances or private unrequited
transfers (net) in the year amounted to $2.12 billion. This
evidences their loyalty and commitment to the country. In the
history of the 4th Republic and the country, there is not a
single case, where a dual citizen has been found to betray the
country. On the other hand, many dual citizens played an
active role in creating the conditions that led to the
establishment of the 4th Republic.
We have complex problems in the country and we must recah out
to our citizens everywhere for solutions. All hands on deck.
This Parliament must repeal the discriminatory exclusions.
S. Kwaku Asare
May 30, 2012
|
