Paper Presented By Prof. Ken Agyemang Attafuah, Ph.D., B.L, Executive Secretary of the National Identification Authority, Accra on a Symposium on Nation Building organized by the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung. Venue: Alisa Hotel, North Ridge, Date: March 11, 2009

Topic: Socio-Economic Development – A Pre-Condition for Nation Building
Madam Chairperson, Your Excellency Dr. Marius Haas, German Ambassador to Ghana, Hon. Haruna Iddrissu, Minister for Communications, Mr. Klaus Loetzer, KAS Representative, Prof. N. S. Nabilla, President of the National House of Chiefs, Prof. George Hagan, Chairman of the National Commission on Culture, Hon. Gifty Ohene-Konadu, MP for Asante-Akyem South, other Distinguished Members of Parliament, civil society representatives, friends from the media, Ladies and Gentlemen:

I have been asked to examine the relationship between socio-economic development and nation building. The symposium organizers suggested that I consider the following ideas in my exploration of the issue:

1. General socio-economic perspectives on nation building
   
2. An analysis of the nexus between society and nation building
   
3. Efforts at nation building through educational institutions and other working relations
   
4. Critical issues of multi-ethnic groups and nation building
   
5. How socio-economic development enhances nation building or otherwise
   
6. Some institutional efforts at nation building in Ghana
   
7. Other socio-economic issues and nation-building

I hope to address the salient concerns raised in these suggestions, though not necessarily in the format presented. I also hope to discuss other dimensions of the topic such as the meaning of socio-economic development, variants and elements of nation building, characteristics of a cultivated or built nation, threats to nation building in Ghana, and future directions in nation building in contemporary Ghana.

Madam Chairperson,

I wish to offer the following propositions on the subject at the outset:

1. Both socio-economic development and nation building are dynamic, continuous processes;
   
2. Socio-economic development does not necessarily produce nation-building;
   
3. The relationship between socio-economic development and nation building is best conceived as an intertwining, symbiotic and mutually engaging processes, i.e., nation building produces the social and political conditions that conduce to the socio-economic development of a state, and socio-economic development, properly managed, aids and fosters nation building;
   
4. Properly understood, nation building entails socio-economic development. In other words, socio-economic development is best appreciated as an integral part of the process of nation building; and
   
5. If, in the conceptualization of socio-economic development and nation building, the two processes are seen to face the classic chicken-and-egg riddle, i.e., which is the parent of the other, I will venture to declare nation building the parent, and socio-economic development the child.

Perspectives on Socio-Economic Development and nation-Building

1. The Concept of Socio-Economic Development
   Madam Chairperson,
   
   Socio-economic development refers to changes in the life circumstances of a people occasioned by the pursuit of specific social, economic and legal policies by the state. Such changes usually connote improvements in the lives of people within a country. Among other causes that impact on socio-economic development are advances in technology, changes in the physical environment and ecological changes.
   
   Socio-economic development is measured with such indicators as Gross Domestic Product (GDP), life expectancy, literacy levels, scale and quality of employment, and access to healthcare. Socio-economic development is also frequently measured in terms of human rights, i.e., in terms of the extent to which conditions exist for people to satisfy their basic needs in dignity and respect. Thus, qualitative improvements in the scale of personal dignity and freedoms are critical in assessing the socio-economic development of any country.
   
   It is apparent from the formulation of the topic, “Socio-Economic Development – a Pre-Condition for Nation Building”, that nation-building is conceived as the end goal of socio-economic development. My reflections on the subject, based in part on the foregoing brief survey of the outlines of socio-economic development and on the ensuing detailed analysis of nation building, lead me to a different conclusion. It is my considered opinion that, while socio-economic development and nation building are critically intertwined, there are compelling reasons, grounded in the practical experiences of many nations, and in theories of state-society relations and development, to conceive of nation building as the parent, not the child, of economic development.
   
   Madam Chairperson,
   
   Examples abound in both the past and present to sustain the argument that where economic development efforts have preceded or taken precedence over nation-building, the result has often been chaotic – self implosion, ethnic discontent and racial strife. Athens provides us with a historical example, while Ivory Coast and Zimbabwe provide living proof of what can go wrong when economic development does not move in tandem with nation-building.
   
   
2. The Concept of Nation Building
   In Africa, the concept of nation building gained considerable scholastic and practical currency during the period of African decolonization in the 1960s and early 1970s. The euphoria and goodwill that attended the attainment of political independence were not translated into vital social capital for the socio-economic development of the various independent African countries. Corruption, economic mismanagement, thievery from state coffers and exploitation of ethnic differences for political advantage ensured the further impoverishment of the African. Existing bank reserves were largely squandered while natural resources were plundered and exported to Europe and North America.
   
   Across the African continent, but particularly in West Africa, the anti-colonial freedom fighters were soon booted out of office for allegedly accentuating the poverty of the masses and failing to engage in serious nation building efforts. The neo-colonialist liberators and redeemers in khaki were soon replaced by hungry and populist revolutionaries all of whom also failed woefully to facilitate the attainment of socio-economic development, peace and nation building. Today, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Guinea, Cote D’Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin and Nigeria are all entrapped in what appears to be in a state of perpetual infancy in nation building and the facilitation of economic development. Malawi, Burundi, DR Congo, Kenya, Rwanda, South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe are examples of other countries on the continent that failed to build nations when they should have, and are still grappling with the painful costs of development without nation building.
   
   
3. Nation Building as Modernization and State-Building
   Cataclysmic political change often engenders the necessary conditions for a focused attention to nation-building. In addition, post-conflict societies undergoing national reconstruction often find transitional justice arrangements, such as truth and reconciliation commissions, as necessary components of nation building. Again, South Africa, Nigeria, Ghana, Morocco, Sierra Leone and Liberia provide us with classic examples of countries that have experimented, with different degrees of success, with truth and reconciliation commissions (TRCs) as mechanisms for healing and nation building. Cote D’Ivoire, Togo, Kenya and Zimbabwe are at different stages of establishing transitional justice mechanisms.

In Europe, the end of the Cold War provided the occasion for the United Nations, NATO, the United States and a range of other states and nongovernmental organizations to engage directly and increasingly in nation-building operations. In this context, nation-building refers to broad efforts to promote political and economic reforms with the objective of transforming a society emerging from conflict into one at peace with itself and its neighbors. This is the first meaning or variant of nation building.

In post-conflict societies, nation building equals state-building. It often entails the massive investment or deployment of financial resources and humanitarian aid. Indeed, in the contemporary world, nation building is a strategy of modernization modeled after the Marshall Plan – the magnificent reconstruction effort initiated by the United States in 1947 to rebuild some European nations devastated by the World War II. The implementation of that plan cost $12 billion between 1948 and 1951 under President Truman.

Nation building also frequently requires the use of armed force to ensure law and order. As in Liberia, Sierra Leone, DR Congo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia and Belarus, armed force was considered vital to securing the appropriate environment for the pursuit of other restorative and national reconstruction measures.

Thus, the key constituent elements that make up any nation-building mission in the narrow sense may be summarized as:

1. Deployment of military and police forces for law enforcement;
   
2. Establishment of rule of law;
   
3. Provision of humanitarian relief;
   
4. Promotion of good governance and democratization; and
   
5. The pursuit of economic stabilization and development. In this sense, nation building is essentially a process of restoration and modernization.

Madam Chairperson,
Nation building is not the preserve of nationals living within the territory; Ghanaians abroad also contribute immensely to building the nation when they send down remittances to support relatives, educate children, and invest in commercial farming or other business venture.

But nation building is also not the exclusive preserve of countries emerging out of colonialism and violent conflicts. For instance, nation building keenly engaged the attention of Canada during the late 1980s and early 1990s as it grappled with the issue of how best to manage its ethnic diversity through the Meech Lake Accord and other agreements. This search was not only reflected in its Aboriginal, Francophone and Anglophone heritages but also in the multicultural reality of that country’s ethnic tapestry – from the long-established Asian communities from China and Japan who built the longest railway line in the world to the Caribbean and African peoples whose slave labour built the foundations of Canada’s industries.

Today, the United States is grappling with a different kind of nation building founded on revitalizing the relatively shattered American economy, saving industries, jobs and banks, paying for education, rebuilding families, and generally restoring hope to millions. Building on the dreams of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., America under President Obama is also building a nation that is more inclusive and fairer, kinder and gentler.

Nation Building as National Identity Formation and Governance
But the concept of nation building has a second, broader and probably more compelling meaning. In its broad sense, nation building refers to the process of constructing or structuring a national identity through the use of state power. The exercise of state power in aid of nation building commonly finds expression along two key dimensions, namely social psychological engagement and infrastructural development. The aim of nation building is to foster a shared and coherent national identity, orientation and unification among the people or peoples of a state in order to ensure the long-term political stability and viability of the state.

Typically, nation building in this broad sense entails the simultaneous use of strategies of mass reorientation, including propaganda, and major infrastructural developments to foster social harmony and economic growth. The second variant of nation building also emphasizes the development of the social sector comprising education, health and family welfare, water supply, sanitation, housing, social welfare, nutrition, rural employment and minimum basic services.

Symbolic efforts and manifestations of such orientation in aid of nation building may include (a) the introduction of superficial national paraphernalia such as flags, anthems, pledges and currencies, national identity cards; (b) the institution of national holidays; (c) the establishment of national colleges and universities, airlines and stadiums; (d) the institution of a lingua franca or national language for the state; (e) and the production, articulation or propagation of national myths. Nation Building is thus a complex and dynamic process with ideological, philosophical, political, socio-economic and cultural dimensions.

This broad view of nation building, then, is a deliberate political and cultural process of constructing or moulding a common nation out of hitherto independent political and ethno-cultural groups or tribes. In other words, the task of nation building in this broad sense is the creation of a universal national identity and sense of common destiny for people who previously belonged to different social formations and who defined and perceived their destinies as diametrically opposed. Thus, for instance, at the time of independence in 1957, the Gold Coast was a motley collection of different nation-states previously formed from the magma of wars, political alliances dictated by fear of military conquests, colonial annexation and impositions. Indeed, the Asante Kingdom, for example, was an amalgam of several smaller nation-states that came together to form a single political, military and religious entity under King Osei Tutu I “because of war” – osa nti. [The Asante nation gained its name from the corruption of the “Osa nti” to “Asante”]

Nation building in much of Africa commenced in the post-independence period as a reaction against the divide-and-rule tactics of the colonialists. It is an enterprise of persuading, manipulating, moulding, cementing and bonding diverse peoples into a nation with a common emotional relationship to the state and modernizing and improving their material socio-economic circumstances. That process continues to this day. This form of nation building thus requires the subordination of all competing ethno-cultural, primordial loyalties in a state to an emergent nationhood and supra ethnic identity.

Some Institutional Efforts at Nation Building in Ghana
Significant institutional and policy efforts at nation building in Ghana include the following:

1. Affirmative action policies of the Nkrumah Government – establishment of boarding schools, fair and equitable distribution of scholarship across the country, and multi-ethnic appointments,
   
2. Broad civic education on citizenship, national cohesion and human rights education by:
   
   1. The erstwhile Centre for Civic Education of the late 1960s;
      
   2. The National Charter Secretariat of the 1970s; and
      
   3. The National Commission for Civic Education – the constitutional body charged with the promotion of civic awareness about duties and responsibilities of the citizenry;
      
   4. The Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ)
      
   5. The National Commission on Culture
   
   
   
3. The Role of the CHRAJ, pursuant to Article 218(b) of the Constitution, in investigating complaints “concerning the functioning of the Public Services Commission, the administrative organs of the State, the Armed Forces, the Police Service and the Prisons Service in so far as complaints relate to the failure to achieve a balanced structuring of those services or equal access by all to the recruitment of those services or fair administration in relation to those service”. The typical focus of concern in such complaints and investigations are ethnicity, gender and regionalism;
   
4. The role of the National Reconciliation Commission in excavating Ghana’s history of human rights violations, administrative measures and other acts and omissions that fractured the nation or otherwise undermined national cohesion;
   
5. The role of Parliament in enacting legislation to promote nation building;
   
6. The role of the Judiciary in the progressive interpretation of laws during adjudication in order to advance socio-economic development, national cohesion and unity;
   
7. The role of political parties in serving as national platforms for the articulation of common ideologies, visions and aspirations for the governance of the nation; and
   
8. The role of the National Identification Authority in establishing a credible national identification system to accelerate socio-economic development and promote a symbolic sense of belonging through the use of the national identity card.

Elements of Nation Building as Identity Formation and Governance

What, then, may be described as the essential elements of the second variant of nation building? In my view, the foremost elements of nation building are:

1. vigorously pursuing socio-economic development;
   
2. Promoting inter-group harmony;
   
3. Advancing and protecting human rights, administrative justice and integrity in private and public life;
   
4. Engendering a sense of national identity and belonging;
   
5. Nurturing an open society;
   
6. Fostering respect for the rule of law, transparency and accountability;
   
7. Ensuring individual and public safety and security; and
   
8. Creating the social and political space for a vibrant civil society to flourish and participate in the process of governance at the local and national levels.

Constitutional Foundations of Nation Building in Ghana
Socio-economic development and nation building are constitutional imperatives in Ghana. Indeed, Ghana’s Constitution (1992) provides a legal framework for the pursuit of socioeconomic development and nation building. In the Preamble to the Constitution, the people of Ghana assert their conviction that the purpose of establishing a democratic framework of government is to “secure for [themselves] and posterity the blessings of liberty, equality of opportunity and prosperity”. Article 1(1) also provides that the welfare of the people of Ghana constitutes the basis for the exercise of governmental power. The essence of that welfare is elaborated upon in the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) found in Chapter Six of the Constitution which, in Article 34(1), calls for the use of law and state power to establish “a just and free society”.

Accordingly, Article 34(2) specifies the realization of the following fundamental conditions of liberty and human welfare for Ghanaians as the foremost job description of the State:

1. Basic human rights
   
2. A healthy economy
   
3. The right to work
   
4. The right to good health care; and
   
5. The right to education

Given the great importance the framers of our Constitution attached to these cardinal conditions for ensuring the welfare of the people, Article 34(2) obliges the President to “report to Parliament at least once a year” all the steps taken by Government to ensure their realization. Indeed, for Ghana, these foundational elements of human liberty and prosperity constitute the key benchmarks of socio-economic development, which the Government of every President must earnestly strive to achieve. This article therefore provides the compulsory template for the essential contents of the President’s Sessional Address to Parliament.

The Constitution also obliges the President to pursue, and report to Parliament on, other key policy objectives contained in the DPSP. And I must add that the President does not have to report to Parliament only once a year, but at least once year! Minimalism is not a best practice when it comes to public sector accountability.

Madam Chairperson,

We build the nation when we sincerely and prudently commit our energies and resources in the pursuit of these socio-economic development goals as contained in Vision 2020 of old, and in the first and second Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy (GPRS I & II) documents. We build the nation when we sincerely and prudently, in accordance with Article 35(2) of the Constitution “protect and safeguard the independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ghana”, and when we “seek the well-being of all”.

We also build the nation when, as required of us by Article 35(2), we sincerely “promote just and reasonable access by all citizens to public facilities and services in accordance with law”. We further build the nation when we enable people to achieve their goals without placing frustrating impediments in their way. We build the nation when we allow everyone to belong; when we do not discriminate against anyone based on race, colour, ethnicity, ancestry, place of origin, sex, age, physical or mental disability, economic status, social status, and family status.

We build the nation when our chiefs set personal examples of tolerance and acceptance of diversity, when they engage in high level cultural diplomacy – when the Agbogbomefia of Anlo pays a courtesy visit to the Asantehene, when the Nayiri of Mamprugu exchanges visits the Nzimahene, the Wa Na visits the Ga Manste, or the Drobohene visits the Krobohene, and forge friendships in real and substantive ways. What positive impact on inter-group relations there would be, when ethnic groups join forces to stage food festivals in celebration of each other cultures, and organize language clinics for members of the other ethno-cultural group.

We build the nation when we protect and defend the civil rights of all persons from discrimination and unfair treatment regardless of their political orientation or affiliation, or their religious persuasion or creed. We build the nation when we do not abuse our power or authority at the workplace; we build the nation when we do not subject our subordinates at the office, factory or church to bullying, sexual harassment or other form of demeaning treatment or humiliation.

We build the nation when we cultivate among all Ghanaians “respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms and the dignity of the human being.” The dignity of the human being, we are told in Article 15(1), is “inviolable”. That means that human dignity as sacred. A nation is built and sustained when it respects the dignity of all persons within its boundaries.

Madam Chairperson,

In a most progressive pursuit of nation-building, Article 35(5) of the Constitution charges the State with the obligation to “actively promote the integration of the peoples of Ghana; it charges the State to prohibit discrimination and prejudice on the grounds of place of origin, circumstances of birth, ethnic origin, gender or religion, creed or other beliefs”. Towards this end, the State is further required to pursue appropriate measures, among other things, to:

1. foster a spirit of loyalty to Ghana that overrides sectional, ethnic and other loyalties;
   
2. achieve reasonable regional and gender balance in recruitment and appointment to public offices; and
   
3. provide adequate facilities for, and encourage, free mobility of people, goods and services throughout Ghana.

The State is also obliged to take steps to eradicate corrupt practices and the abuse of power, and to promote political tolerance among Ghanaians.

In Article 36, the State is enjoined to competently manage the national economy with a view to maximizing the rate of economic development and securing the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every person in Ghana. It must also provide adequate means of livelihood and suitable employment for the people, as well as public assistance to the needy.

In particular, Article 36(6) requires the State to afford equality of economic opportunity to all citizens, and to take all necessary steps to ensure the full integration of women into the mainstream of the economic development of Ghana.

Madam Chairperson,

These, then, are the core goals of nation building as enshrined in the Ghanaian Constitution. Nation building in contemporary Ghanaian society, as in the contemporary world generally, thus includes the active promotion of good governance, including the eradication of corruption and the prevention and control of administrative injustice and abuse of power.

Socio-Economic Development as a primary precondition for Nation- Building
Permit me now to address the issue of socio-economic development as a condition for nation building. Socio-economic development provides an impetus for nation-building. Much racial bigotry and ethnic prejudice melt away when the processes of socio-economic development plunge strangers from different social groups into unavoidable cooperation or collaboration on such arenas as education, workplace, the sports team or the battalion. The boarding school in Ghana, for instance, served as a training ground in inter-group tolerance, peaceful co-existence and social harmony. More than the university, the factory or the church, it was in the boarding schools of this country that the most enduring inter-ethnic friendships were forged, and where long-term political alliances were incubated and nurtured. Respect for religious diversity and tolerance was better fostered among our peoples from interactions in the boarding school than from the state propaganda apparatus. It is evident from the foregoing that socio-economic development is the handmaiden of nation-building.

As with all processes, nation building aims at the production of a preferred outcome – a society in which most citizens emotionally and intellectually identify themselves with the salient manifestations of its nationhood, and the citizens evince a sense of unity, a common outlook, and a sense of shared destiny.

Other Characteristics of a Built Nation
Madam Chairperson,
The built or cultivated nation evinces the following attributes or characteristics:

• Most citizens of the built nation possess a firm grasp of, and pride in, their national identity
  
• Reverence toward emblems and icons of nationhood
  
• A “settled populace” in the sense that most citizens have are content to live the most productive years of their lives within the country, and travel abroad as more as tourists than envious economic migrants.
  
• A confident national persona with the capacity to welcome “outsiders”
  
• Widespread respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms and their corresponding duties and responsibilities
  
• Responsible exercise of rights and freedoms
  
• Highly dependable, hardworking and transferable workforce

Although these characteristics are matters of degree that probably better fit into a typology of societies with growing as opposed to mature sense of nationhood, it is possible to gauge where our country, in 52 years of official “nationhood, may be situated.

Characteristics of the Accidental Nation
The foregoing characteristics of the built or cultivated nation may be contrasted with what I describe as the accidental nation. The accidental nation perennially remains an amorphous collection of disparate groups uncemented by any deep or extensive ties and symbols of nationhood. Devoid of a sense of nationalism and nationhood, citizens of the accidental nation maintain primary loyalties to the leadership of their particular cultural groups, identify with the myths and icons of the tribe maintain a strong sense of in-group solidarity and look upon out-group members with suspicion and mistrust. The label “nation” is accorded the accidental nation by foreign countries and international organizations as a simple commonplace register for all countries.
Usually a creation of colonialism, the most significant characteristics of the accidental nation include the following:

• Retention of the physical and mental relics of undemocratic [colonial] and parochial
  
• Prevalence of a noisy, impatient, quarrelsome or pugnacious outlook
  
• Prevalence of inter-generational nomadism, i.e., the quality of being an unsettled population in the sense that most citizens of the state are, from generation to generation, in a constant search for opportunities to migrate to other lands
  
• Denigration and underdevelopment of local languages
  
• Prevalence of a fetish preference for foreign culture, especially language, food, myths and music
  
• Predominance of foreign-inspired development frameworks
  
• Widespread belief in, and emphasis of, rights to the virtual neglect of duties and responsibilities
  
• Fairly easy-going, minimalist and “timeless” workforce with little discipline

Threats to Nation Building in Ghana
The enterprise of nation building in Africa is as relevant and compelling today as it was in the early 1960s owing to the gigantic failures, or mildly put, the limited successes made over the last four decades. From Rwanda and Burundi through Somalia, Ethiopia and Sudan to Liberia, Cote D’Ivoire, Ghana and Nigeria, ethnic prejudice and discrimination continue to haunt and frustrate nation building efforts. To be sure, Ghanaians have made some gains on the path toward nationhood, even if the perennial Abudu-Adani, Kokomba-Nanumba, Mamprusi-Kusasi, Asante-Ewe and Christian-traditionalist conflicts and frictions threaten national identity and dismay us.
But the major threats to our nascent nationhood in all its dimensions may be summarized as follows:

• Corruption and its effects
  
• Abuse of Power
  
• Economic mismanagement and failure to bridge the north-south divide
  
• Unbridled partisanship and cyclical political victimization
  
• Maintenance of a “spoils system” and the attitude of “winner-takes-all” in politics
  
• The politics of negative competition
  
• Growing political violence and strategic silence of segments of the national political leadership
  
• Chieftaincy conflicts and disputes over access to land
  
• Ethnic voting blocks and enclaves
  
• Ethnic discrimination in state institutions
  
• The blatant celebration of ethnocentrism instead of national identity and pride
  
• Crime and the growing but baseless ethnicization of particular crimes, e.g. blaming particular tribes for drug trafficking
  
• Radio rule and tyranny (by the media practitioners)
  
• Capitulation to populism and ethnic politics

Corruption
Madam Chairperson,
Kindly permit me to elaborate on the first two threats to nation building in Ghana – corruption and abuse of power.

Public and private sector corruption have long hampered nation-building in Ghana. In a paper I presented at a garden discussion organized by the Institute of Economic Affairs exactly 10 years ago titled “Corruption and the Challenge of Economic Development”, I made the following observations on the costs of corruption:

The enormous costs of corruption can be measured not only in terms of the loss of funds for development, over-inflated administrative costs and capital flight, but also in terms of the loss of legitimacy and respect for legally constituted authority, public loss of confidence in systems and institutions and lowering of moral values.

Corruption also violates civil and political rights, as well as the right to economic and social development. It fosters the appointment of the proverbial “square pegs in round holes”, nourishes mediocrity and undermines the merit system of rewards, appointments and entitlements. Corruption engenders market inefficiencies, and fosters the deliberate creation of bottlenecks in the bureaucracy in order to further the ends of exploitation. In short, the canker of corruption is a hindrance to economic development and social advancement. This is only a brief portrait of the manifestations and dire consequences of this social evil.

Today, Madam Chairperson, I will add that the colossal costs of corruption are also to be seen in measures that could have been, but were never, implemented to reduce ethnic bigotry, improve inter-group relations, and cement the people of different social backgrounds more cohesively along the elegant and uniting principles of citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the nation, pride in national identity, commitment to equality of opportunity, and belief in social justice for all.

Madam Chairperson, I will insist now, as I did 10 years ago, that

“Any serious effort to grapple with the canker of corruption must be comprehensive, broad-based, and developmental. To succeed, it must be anchored in a well-considered social and economic development agenda, efficient and impartial law enforcement, and the promotion of high integrity throughout our society. The anti-corruption effort must also be grounded in the creation of a civically-conscious society alert to the evils of corruption and willing to report corrupt conduct to the appropriate authorities.
A regime of sanctions and punishments have a better chance of success if they are swift, certain and severe. Such a regime is also destined for success if it is applied alongside a broad-based and thoughtful programme that promotes integrity, reduces poverty, provides a living wage, and provides adequate resources and equipment for anti-corruption agencies such as the Ghana Police Service, the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice, and the Serious Fraud Office.

Most importantly, Madam Chairperson, our chances of succeeding in the fight against corruption will be significantly enhanced if we, as a people, stop the rabid and fanatical politicization of the trial of virtually every senior public officer for corruption or irresponsible exercise of discretionary power that makes Ghana financially poorer for it. We will succeed if we stop the unwarranted debasement of the judiciary and the cruel intimidation and militant condemnation of judges who preside over trials we define as political.

Abusive Exercise of State Power
Arbitrary action causes fear and insecurity and engenders a sense of exclusion. Public office holders in Ghana are constitutionally required to be just in their administrative decisions and actions. Specifically, Article 23 of the Constitution of Ghana (1992) provides that:

“Administrative bodies and administrative officials shall act fairly and reasonably and comply with the requirements imposed on them by law and persons aggrieved by the exercise of such acts and decisions shall have the right to seek redress before a court or other tribunal.”

This obligation to act fairly is further buttressed by Article 296 (a) and (b) of the Constitution, which relates to the exercise of discretionary power. Article 296(a) provides as follows:

“Where in this Constitution or in any other law discretionary power is vested in any person or authority –

1. that discretionary power shall be deemed to imply a duty to be fair and candid;
   
2. the exercise of the discretionary power shall not be arbitrary, capricious or biased wither by resentment, prejudice or personal dislike and shall be in accordance with due process of law … .

Madam Chairperson,

Those who exercise discretionary power have a duty to be fair to every person, and to give reasons for their decisions; they have an obligation to be candid to those whose interests or rights are adversely affected by the decisions they make. Candour must be rediscovered and re-injected into the bloodstream of public office. The public officer must be sincere when he signs “Yours Sincerely” at the end of the letter; she must truly believe in the contents of the communication when she signs off as “Yours Truly”, at the end of the letter. No wonder today, letters in the public service and civil service are signed without the empty civility of these traditional modes of signing off.

But private sector workers must also appreciate that not everyone who works in the public sector is corrupt, lazy, docile, inefficient or insensitive. A great deal of the strides in socio-economic development of our country have resulted from the manifest commitment to the high ideals of patriotism, loyalty and integrity in public service coupled with demonstrated industry and sacrifice by selfless public and civil servants. The holier-than-thou attitude of many private sector critics of public servants rings hollow and hypocritical. This is because much corruption in the public sector is the result of inducements by private sector persons to circumvent established procedures, or to avoid compliance with their statutory obligations.

Future Directions in Nation Building

Madam Chairperson,

Our country will make significant advances in nation-building if we tailor our development strategies closely to the DPSP contained in Chapter Six of the Ghanaian Constitution. As outlined in the DPSP, the key principles that must be earnestly promoted in order to achieve effective nation-building are:

1. Pursuit of a viable socio-economic development agenda;
   
2. Fair and equitable distribution of the benefits of development;
   
3. Promotion of inclusivity, acceptance and shared sense of belonging;
   
4. Prevention of Discrimination based on the prohibited grounds enumerated in Article 17(2) of the Constitution and elsewhere; and
   
5. Promotion of fundamental human rights, social justice and the rule of law.

Madam Chairperson,

To succeed with nation building efforts generally, there must be a firm commitment on the part of Government and civil society to social justice – a view that everyone is entitled to fair treatment, equitable access to the opportunities and resources of the State, and to prosper in life; a view that those who are disadvantaged by circumstances and the accidents of birth must be helped along the ladder of personal growth and development. It is a view that the nation is better built and made even stronger when no one is left behind; when, in the language of the times, “we all move forward in the right direction”.

Characteristics of a Cultivated or Built Nation
In addition to the foregoing, we as a country will improve and accelerate nation building if we earnestly pursue the following critical ingredients or characteristics of a well-built nation:

• An independent, efficient and trustworthy judiciary
  
• An efficient, stable and dependable educational system not given to whimsical tinkering
  
• Promotion of sense national identity
  
• Promotion of patriotism and national orientation
  
• Cultivation of a productive and reliable workforce

Madam Chairperson,

It has to be acknowledged that fundamentally, nation-building is the turning a state into a nation, uniting its peoples and improving their scale of well-being. It is, thus, a long- term social development process which results in the transformation of the social structures and attitudinal templates of the people in a manner that improves the capacity of the people to fulfill their aspirations.

In the long run, in spite of their brilliant intellectual appeal, nationhood and democracy must yield measurable dividends in the lives of the people, otherwise they become expensive enterprises with hollow platitudes, and subject to populist manipulation or even vulnerable to being overthrown.

For these reasons, Government’s foremost duty is to guarantee that the affairs of the state are conducted in as competent and profitable a manner as any corporate body could do under similar circumstances, while humanely carrying along all segments of the society, especially the weakest and most vulnerable members. For the truest measure of a civilized society consists not in the number of physical infrastructures it constructs, but in the extent to which it protects and advances the wellbeing of its weakest and most vulnerable members.

Thus, we must urgently pursue measures to protect the dignity of persons with physical and mental disability in this country, not just by establishing employment quotas for those with physical disabilities and housing the mentally disabled in well resourced psychiatric hospitals, but in truly facilitating, through a comprehensive set of measures and educational campaigns, their full and equitable integration into, and participation in, mainstream activities of the state and our communities. Employers, for instance, must appreciate that they bear a duty to reasonably accommodate physical and mental disability to the point of undue hardship, and that the burden is not discharged with impressionistic evidence of inability but with objective empirical evidence of reasonable effort, or of impossibility due to undue hardship.

It is imperative therefore that Government promotes and protects respect for the dignity of all persons within the society. And Government must do this first by providing the requisite levels of funding to the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice and the Judicial Service to competently do their work.

Second, and equally importantly, Government must quickly behave in a manner that assures the entire citizenry that it accepts freedom of association, the existence of multiple political viewpoints, and the right to disagree with anyone, including those in power, as foundational elements of a liberal, pluralistic and constitutional democracy on the path of nation building.

Third, Government must move quickly to assure the people of their personal safety and freedom from fear of physical harm from common criminals, as well as operatives of the state, be they military or police. And the state must protect the citizenry from overzealous and vigilante political party loyalists who appoint themselves as enthusiastic state officials commissioned to secure the interests of the state through unlawful means. The national political leadership at the highest levels must roundly condemn political violence perpetrated against political opponents and ethnic minorities. Strategic silence on political violence constitutes tacit endorsement of such violence; it also lends credence to the widespread public belief that politicians turn a blind eye to political violence when it inures to their benefit.

Conclusion
Madam Chairperson,

Nation Building is not an event but a process; it is not a revolution, but it is no fancy needle-work either. Nearly twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, German unification is still a struggle, although from the outside, it seems like a seamless process of integration and socio-political harmony. Failed families and suicides increased vulnerabilities and crime, a sense of anomie and purposelessness were among the initial burdens that many former nationals of East Germany shouldered in the early phase of the unification. South Africa continues to experience the pangs of racial unification and the promotion of multiculturalism. In Ghana, the task of promoting ethnic tolerance and political harmony continue to be as difficult today as it was 52 years ago.

The answers, as I have emphasized, lie in the promotion of good governance, human rights, multiculturalism, cultural diplomacy sound economic management and social justice.

I thank you for your kind attention.

Prof. Ken Agyemang Attafuah
Executive Secretary
National Identification Authority
March 11, 2009