Chapter Five
The Danquah-Busia-Dombo Tradition; Are We Worth the Hype?
The Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition, the very cornerstone of the New Patriotic Party, struggled for only two things for Ghana – FREEDOM and DEVELOPMENT. I think, the early visionaries of this party, Prof. Boahen, Da Rocha, Kuffour, Akufo-Addo, Oquaye and co vehemently agree with me on this accord; thereby the motto – DEVELOPMENT IN FREEDOM. It is better placed and best said if Ghana is to be put under the care of such people. It is very disheartening to hear some people say these group of people are nation wreckers and were against Ghana’s independence. I dare say, if there is any political movement which has far advanced the prosperity of Ghanaians before and after independence, it should be the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition. The founding fathers of this great tradition were peaceful, academics, visionary, mass-centered and liberals. What they sought for Ghanaians was FREEDOM and DEVELOPMENT.
It is very preposterous when I sit back and carefully analyze the chronology of our history. Even though our founding fathers foresaw the tricks Nkrumah sought to play, no one else could, and this for me, is demeaning. Indeed, as Busia was quick to remind Ghanaians, “nsuo beto a, mframa di kan.” It translates as “before it rains; the wind first blows.” Some saw the “mframa” (wind) early at dawn and told us to be mindful of our activities; some saw it in the morning; others saw it at noon; some could not see the wind till the rain started (including even Komla Agbeli Gbedemah, Nkrumah’s right hand man, who ran into exile at long last and only returned to Ghana after the 1966 coup). As Oquaye rightfully said at the 21st Anniversary lecture, “Anytime a Ghanaian invokes his/her right to bail, the right against inhuman treatment etc, let that Ghanaian, no matter the political persuasion of that Ghanaian, pause a moment and appreciate the significance of the fundamental principle of our Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition.”
Suffering Nkrumah’s dictatorship and dislike for constitutional rule, today, we are secure because when Akufo-Addo and others had the opportunity to write a Constitution for Ghana in 1969, they expressly provided for fundamental human rights. This was copied almost verbatim in the 1979 Constitution and also in the 1992 Constitution. It is also important to add that in the 1970s when, Nana Addo Danquah Akufo-Addo was fighting for our rights, freedom of speech, embarking on the dreaded campaigns and the famous “Ku Me Preko” demonstration, some of the arrogant so-called NDC ministers were not even born; yet, they could sit on media platforms and drown this eminent person in insults. It is very sad and very appalling. Some, whom have not even achieved a quarter of what he has, even in politics, could vilify Nana Addo with such distasteful words.
It should be noted that the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition has ruled for only ten years and three months ever since Ghana had independence. The Busia era was a golden age of good governance to be guided by the 1969 Constitution also known as the Akufo-Addo Constitution. By the Preamble to the Constitution, the people of Ghana resolved never again to allow themselves to be subjected to tyrannical rule; and the Constitution ensured the sovereignty of the people, the Rule of Law and guaranteed fundamental human rights including FREEDOM of thought, expression and religion; JUSTICE to all men in every aspect of their lives-social, economic and political; RESPECT for the dignity of every individual and EQUALITY of opportunity. The Constitution provided that any activity of a person, persons, or group of persons which suppressed or sought to suppress lawful political activity of any other person or persons would be an unlawful act and gave the Supreme Court power to grant injunctions against offenders and punish them where necessary, even with imprisonment. In the light of this similar arrangement a new era of political freedom boomed and all opposition groups freely organized themselves and freely criticized the government and propagated their own idea. The independence of the Judiciary was ensured and the Constitution provided that the judicial power of Ghana should be vested only in the Judiciary and no other body should have any final judicial power. The Busia Administration that ruled Ghana from late 1969 to January, 1972, pursued a laissez-faire policy and upheld fundamental human rights and liberties. Nobody was detained for political reasons. Freedom of the Press flourished and the Opposition spoke freely both in Parliament and through several newspapers including the popular Spokesman. The government rightly saw rural development as crucial to economic growth, in that it would first of all lay the foundation for self-sufficiency in food. Secondly, it would prevent the drift of young men to urban areas in search for non-existing white collar jobs. Thirdly, it would boost the cocoa industry, the backbone of the nation’s economy by keeping the famers on the land and making them happy and content. A ministry for rural development was established. An integrated waste management programme was commenced with Israeli support. It was abandoned by Acheampong and we are paying for the consequences. Industries began to boom. Busia boldly tackled the currency disparities through devaluation which was misinterpreted by adventurers who deposed him by the gun. His successors were to devalue thousand times over the years.
To share the development agenda of the NPP from 2001 to 2009 is like putting the soothing music of Kojo Antwi and Daddy Lumba on replay. In that regard, I would leave that untouched.
One very important sector I would want to tackle and throw more light on is the tradition’s contribution towards peace and stability. I chose this to debunk various assertions by some loud-mouthed people that, the NPP wants nothing “PEACE”. The underlying reason of the formation of every political party is to win elections and implement its political vision and agenda.
The pre-independence politics was politics of lies in many ways. In a typical example, lies were spread that the Leaders of our tradition did not want independence. They had coined the expression “shortest possible time” to deceive the people and Nkrumah would bring self-government “now”! The CPP manufactured the lie that J.B. Danquah had connived with the British to divert the attention of the youth from politics to sports; and that is why Danquah had conspired to bring Sydney Abraham from UK to promote sports in Ghana. These and other lies became the backbone of the CPP propaganda machine. Propaganda in politics means the manipulation and application of falsehood to look like truth for political advantage. This method was applied by the NDC to win election 2008. This was in addition to other false methods employed. Suffice to mention the Fiifi Kwetey’s allegation that President Kufuor had stolen all the gold from Bank of Ghana. They also circulated supposed monies held in Prudential Bank by NPP Ministers which totaled more than the reserves held in the Bank of Ghana. Sad to recount, people believed them.
What do we does our tradition see about propaganda? As early as 1954, our progenitors had a debate on whether to have a Propaganda Secretary as the CPP. They firmly decided on the purity of Ghanaian politics. They affirmed that we should remain clean and as the people got enlightened we will always remain their party of preference. So it is no news that the NPP does not engage in the politics of deception and propaganda. As Boakye Agyarko rightfully said “in politics, truth is key. We will never betray the sacred bond of us promising and Ghanaians giving us their trust.”
In the 1979 Elections where we lost to the Nkrumahist Party led by Dr. Hilla Limann taught the Danquah-Busia-Dombo Tradition a bitter lesson- “United We Stand; Divide We Fall.” Some of our leaders formed the United National Convention (UNC) led by William Ofori-Atta (Paa Willie). This divided our votes, and the People’s National Party (PNP) went through with far less votes than that of PFP and UNC put together. Notably, in 1992 when Ghana was returning to party politics, a number of the members of the Movement for Freedom and Justice (MFJ) who were from the CPP and other traditions wanted that Prof. Adu Boahen should lead a broad coalition to fight Rawlings. Adu Boahen, then the most popular opposition politician refused to do anything that would break the Danquah-Busia-Dombo front. He told them all: “now the party is over; let everybody go home.” Adu Boahen was noted to have told Oquaye that, “The mistake of 1979 should
never be repeated. We should organize and compete from the UGCC perspective”.
The 1992 election was a sad one. Indeed, it was broad daylight robbery. The total circumstances did not allow us to go to Court then. The then bearers of the NPP wrote a monumental book The Stolen Verdict and donors were engaged. This resulted in electoral reforms. Again, 1992 Constitution itself was tested in the Courts and the law was employed to enhance the horizons of human rights, liberty and the Rule of Law. Nana Addo-Danquah Akufo-Addo was a shining star in the process. Prof. Adu Boahen was the “essential plaintiff” in many cases because even though our cases were in the name of the Party, he was the driving force who insisted on processes being filed and pursued. B.J. da Rocha and Odoi Sykes gave very good guidance. In all theses, the show boy was Akufo-Addo. Among others, the 31 December holiday and its celebration was cancelled by the Supreme Court. The rights to demonstrate was affirmed and protestations against the regime, unprecedented in the political history of Ghana were witnessed. The Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition had won a sweet victory by constitutional means.
In all these historic circumstances including the recently passed 2012 election petition, never has the NPP instigated violence; not even when in the 2000 elections, Nana Addo lost by the skin of his teeth, he was bold to accept defeat and said that as a politician, you accept the highs with the lows. These numerous efforts of this tradition is highly commendable and this should be made known across the lengths and breadths of the country.
Are we worth the hype? Indeed we are. Let anyone produce a more formidable political proposition in the history of our dear country to unseat this truth.
Founder's Day or Founders' Day Page 6
