Clause & Residual Powers.... A Matter of Bondage to Shackles!!! As much as I love the NDC unquestionably, I also will disagree with leadership fiercely if its decisions seek to undermine the very democratic principles we pride ourselves of. Those who disagree with our (rebel) school argue that the Constitution gives NEC the residual powers to take such a decision, that if upon the powers of NEC, such are arrived at, we (the downtrodden) can only accept it because we have no power to overturn the verdict, and much more interestingly, that when the General speaks, the rest of us have no business speaking because our voice wouldnt survive a millimeter of distance or even if does, it changes nothing. Anyway, Americans say (even if they dont practise it) that, although Americans sometimes find it difficult to say what they mean, they mean what they say. This maxim is simply my motivation. With all fairness to NEC and proponents of this controvercial clause, I suppose their intents are but to ensure that persons who have served or worked for party before are given the opportunity to serve because of their experience. I further suppose, it in summary, seeks to reward and encourage hardwork. Be that as it may, the said clause is fundamentally beset with loopholes if you diagnose it from the flipside upon a comparative analysis. First, does to serve in our dictionary strictly mean to have ever held an executive post? By the clause your answer is in the affirmative. What ho??? Does it mean if you have spent your entire political life assisting the party in terms of resources - time, material, finance, labour and sweat, organisation, mobilisation, suffering abuses, and communicating for the party like many do at all levels, you never can become an executive per the clause if you have never held an executive post at the stipulated levels before? If the clause is anything to go by, then your guess is as good as mine. It means the hustle youve gone through in the name of service to party is null because you never served before. Second, per the clause, if you can only become a Regional executive based on the idea that you were ever a Constituency executive, lets touch on our Constituency executives. Have they really lived up to expectaion to warrant exclusive descrimination? Maybe only a very, very, very few. If you have Constituency executives who could be given supports by their MPs to give to hardworking elders of the party in their respective areas and they end up somewhere, I guess thats the service were talking about! If we have such executive receiving and pocketing monies meant for journalists, I guess their experience and service are such adorable! I will not give you room to ask me to petition any verting commitee because the very people verting them would want them to retain their positions or even advance so they also can. Third, is the clause applicable to the National contest? If no, why? To me, that is where it should apply much more rigorously. You wanna ask me why? If we have an inexperienced National executive, how can they oversee Regional and Constituency exetive who are more experienced than them? If only we are capable of applying the Expectancy Theory of Leadership, then we can safely conclude that the former has barely enough (almost nothing) to learn from their National counterparts - and that clearly marks the beginning of profound administrative disaster in NDC. Lest, NEC says lets retain the current executive at the National level because theyre the only experienced. Considerably, this clause would rather create a situation where people would rather want to contest as executives at the expense of serving the party in other diverse ways. On a lighter note, unless ofcourse, the party is gonna carve out a set of executive portfolios dubbed for the persons suffering for ndc but have never been executives so they can continue to assist the party in that respect. If we throw away people because theyve never led before, how then do we create leaders? How then do we create room for transformational changes? How then do we do away with ineffective and incompetent leadership? How then do we tap the potentials of people at these levels who definitely would bring in a lot of significant impact? To me, taking a cursory look at this decision, I have no qualms in stating unequivocally, that, its strategically pathetic, legally undemocratic, logically deficient, electorally strangulating, and politically politically monstrous, disastrous, uninspiring and suicidal. If we think NEC has the final say..., and that wisdom is only found in the heads of Generals, then lets move on. To the youth of NPP and other parties, I hope youre taking a cue from us and bracing yourselves? On my part, I dont speak because it goes against my candidate or otherwise. I speak to justice. I speak on behalf of the poor faithful of NDC whore to be robbed their right to choice of quality leadership. I speak on behalf of the gentlemen and ladies who have toiled for NDC all their lives yet have never been executives. I speak for no NEC, powerhouse or any Generals. I speak for NDC. I speak for her values. I speak for the good of Ghana. If this will be reason enough to COST me my membership of NDC, I am ready. If this qualifies me as a REBEL, I glady am. ......ing events they say cast their shadows!!! Alhassan Rabiu #Sochenda
Posted on: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 11:29:19 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015