Competent or Not Competent Debate - I Am For And Against
A butterfly can never consider
itself a bird. So also the saying goes that when a crocodile tells you what is
happening beneath the waters, one cannot doubt it. If I put these axioms
together, then I can only agree with the president for people calling his
competency into question.
The president of our dear country
said it's only former presidents who are qualified enough to question his competency.
Yes it is true. I very much agreed with him. Because 'xoxoanu wo gbia yeyea do'
( Leadership by example).
If, as a nation, we have not set
a benchmark for assessing how competent a president is, then how can we say he
is competent or incompetent? Wait a second. In the game of football, many of us
are not coaches but we are able to tell what makes good team/coach even though
we do not have the technical competency of a coach. And so people believe the
same logic can be used by any ordinary Ghanaian to assess the competency of the
president.
In fact, assessment is subjective
and it comes with its own challenges especially when you do not have a benchmark.
This is why we need a National Development Policy, the framework of which will
serve as a guide in assessing the president. That way, any Ghanaian can assess
the performance of a president.
Over the years, we have seen
political parties come into power with their manifesto message. So if indeed we
want to be fair in assessing the competency of a president, then we must
subject it to their manifesto. Therefore I still agreed with the president. But
there is so much double standard in our politics. I know there are certain
international organizations that do periodic assessments of presidents across
the world. And I am convinced those organizations are not owned by former
presidents yet we hail their reports especially when it favours us and criticize
them when it goes against us. I have no doubts whatsoever that if a former
president should describe a sitting president as incompetent, the latter will
still disagree!
Now let me disagree with the
president that assessing the competency of a president is not the reserve of
only former presidents. We have seen this country ruled under different
presidents and political parties. So, even though I have never been a president
before, I can assess another president by doing a comparative analysis based on
what his predecessors have done. I can equally base my assessment on what other
excellent things other presidents are doing around the world. And I think this
is a genuine and a fair way of assessing the competency of our president.
The president's claim that
Ghanaians will retain him as president because of the successes he has chalked
is not true. A sitting president winning an election is not a true reflection
of how good he has ran the country. If one advertises a product of low quality
with a strong message, one would get a lot of buyers but that does not make
that product a high quality one. It is only a few who can differentiate a high
quality product from that of a low one.
Indeed every product has its own
targets. The focus of a politician in an election is mostly on the 'ignorant'
majority. So they craft their message such that that majority can assimilate it
even if they cannot relate with it. Quite apart from that, the government in
power has all the state apparatus to its advantage. I quite remember in 2008
electioneering campaign, all the media houses in Ghana including the
state-owned, were focused on only one political party during their final
rallies. Clearly, any party that wants to win an election focus its attention
on the 'ignorant' majority who have short memories and will accept a few cedis
just to vote for you.
So measuring the competency of a
president is not the preserve of only former presidents and winning an election
is not a true reflection of how good you have ran the country. Winning an
election is about tactics and strategies that is aimed at a section of the
electorates.
Comments
Post a Comment