Where Are 44 Ghanaians Killed In Gambia – NPP

Details

Category: NewsBrief

Created on Thursday, 12 February 2015 00:00

Hits: 4925

Where Are 44 Ghanaians Killed In Gambia – NPP

The opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP) says President John Mahama owes Ghanaians a duty to explain the whereabouts of the 44 Ghanaians reportedly killed in the Gambia in 2005.

No comments

“Danquah – The unfinished agenda" - Nana Akufo-Addo

Details

Category: Special Reports

Created on Wednesday, 04 February 2015 00:00

Hits: 4033

“Danquah – The unfinished agenda" - Nana Akufo-Addo

SPEECH BY NANA ADDO DANKWA AKUFO-ADDO, 2016 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE OF THE NEW PATRIOTIC PARTY (NPP), AT THE COMMEMORATION OF THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE DEATH OF DR. J.B. DANQUAH AT THE ACCRA INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE CENTRE, ACCRA, ON 4TH FEBRUARY, 2015

ON “DANQUAH – THE UNFINISHED AGENDA”.

We are here to commemorate the life of one of the most extraordinary persons that the Ghanaian people have ever given to the world. He was born 120 years ago at Bepong in Kwahu, and died in the dungeons of Nsawam Medium Security Prison exactly 50 years ago today. In the 70 years in between, he lived a life truly fulfilled, rich in output, pregnant with significance and extensive in reach. Philosopher, theologian, scholar, jurist, historian, playwright, poet, journalist, freedom fighter, statesman, Joseph Boakye Danquah was a member of the legendary “Big Six”, together with Emmanuel Obetsebi Lamptey, Edward Akufo-Addo, Ebenezer Ako Adjei, William Ofori-Atta and Kwame Nkrumah, who are acknowledged as the founding fathers of Ghana.

{sidebar id=10 align=right}I dare say that I will not overreach myself when I say that Danquah’s memory will continue to live, at least, for as long as this nation Ghana lives.

He gave our country its name, Ghana, after years of research into the history and traditions of the people of the Gold Coast. He fought, first for the union of the geographical entity, we now call Ghana, and then he fought for Ghana to be established as a free, independent state. Finally, he fought to defend the liberties of the Ghanaian people, by insisting on a democratic system of government under the rule of law as the best form of government for independent Ghana. It was in the course of this, the last of his herculean labours, that the Ghanaian colossus literally gave his life at Nsawam Prison.

A good insight into his character is given by a quote from a letter he wrote from prison in October 1961 to President Nkrumah, demanding his freedom: “The turbulent national problems are invariably approached by me with philosophic calm. I am aware that such an approach does not always lead to “popular” or “quick” results, but what it creates becomes a permanent part of history”.

A prolific writer of books, poems, plays, pamphlets, letters and author of more than a few lengthy speeches in the Legislative Council and later in the Legislative Assembly, Danquah’s thoughts on the Ghana he dreamed of, have been fortuitously documented. What comes through clearly from his thoughts is that the Ghana of his dreams is still an unfinished agenda, a work in progress.

SELF-GOVERNMENT

In 1947, giving the keynote address at the launching in Saltpond of Ghana’s first political party, the United Gold Coast Convention, UGCC of blessed memory, on that fateful Saturday of 4th August, Danquah articulated his strong belief that the people of the Gold Coast had the right to be free from British rule and Imperialism. He stated: “We have come to take a decision whether our country and people are any longer to tolerate a system of government under which those who are in control of government are not under the control of those who are governed.”

In 1952, during a debate on Constitutional Reform in the Legislative Assembly, he declared: “There is no school nor University for liberty or freedom; neither liberty nor freedom is a degree or a diploma to be acquired after years of tears and toil and sweat in a school or in a University. Freedom is a birthright, and liberty is its expression. We desire to be liberated because we know we are entitled to be free…”

Thankfully, that part of his agenda was finished during his lifetime when Ghana obtained its independence from the British in 1957 under Kwame Nkrumah’s dynamic leadership.

RULE OF LAW

Danquah was an ardent believer in the rule of law and in a Constitution in which the rights of the individual were secured against the great powers of the State. Today’s Ghana is closer to what Danquah and others envisaged: a free, democratic, multiparty state, where the rule of law, respect for human rights, individual liberty and the principles of democratic accountability are generally accepted as the basic principles by which the affairs of state should be organised. As the Nigerian statesman, Nnamdi Azikiwe, predicted five decades ago at Danquah’s death: “If the lessons of history mean much, then the sacrifice of West Africa’s pioneer scholar, lawyer, journalist, poet, statesman and fighter in the cause of human freedom will not be in vain.”

Indeed, his struggles and even his death have not been in vain. We live in a Ghana now where the Supreme Court has express power to pronounce on the constitutionality of legislation and to strike down offending legislation. This is what he unsuccessfully sought from the Supreme Court in 1961 in the case of Re Akoto, when he brought an application for an order of habeas corpus for the release from detention of the Asantehene’s Senior Linguist and founder of the National Liberation Movement, the fearless Baffour Osei Akoto. History has been kinder to him than the Korsah Court was. We now also have a Human Rights ‘Fast Track’ Court, whose business it is to guard jealously the liberties of Ghanaian citizens, a development of which Danquah would have been proud. We live today in a Ghana where governments can change by ballots and do change by ballots and will change by the ballot. This is the political freedom for which the likes of Danquah, Obetsebi Lamptey, Dombo, Busia, Victor Owusu, Adu Boahen and the others sacrificed.

DEVELOPMENT IN FREEDOM

In 1950, J.B. Danquah stated: “Our duty is to liberate the energies of the people for the growth of a property-owning democracy in this land, with a right to life, and freedom and justice as the principles to which the government and laws of the land should be dedicated to in order specifically to enrich the lives, property and liberty of each and every citizen.” This became the policy of the United Party, and is today the policy of the New Patriotic Party.

In the eyes of this great man who founded our tradition, a property-owning democracy for a free, independent Ghana could never mean luxury for an elite at the expense of the poor. His vision was to establish a foundation of equal opportunities which will enable the broad spread of the benefits of private ownership to the greatest majority of citizens, not just a rich and privileged few. Danquah’s vision was to build in Ghana a society where every Ghanaian was empowered with access to education, skills and job opportunities to contribute fully to nation building and self-enhancement.

This was why the policy of the NPP government from 2001 to 2009 was to clear the ground for the purpose of inviting every Ghanaian to climb the ladder of competitive achievement. We know that, without many players, markets fail to deliver quality at the best price and without everybody on board, our democratic ship risks sinking under its own tilted weight.

This thinking is very much against what is being exhibited currently in Ghana, which permits a small class to have a near monopoly of the wealth of the country. A similar state of affairs in his day made Danquah declare in 1950 in the Legislative Council about the colonial government: “What we want is a Government in touch with the very life of their people, the sorrows, their groans, their wants, their sufferings and their grievances and until we get that government this country will forever continue to agitate and demand for a better Government.”

Ladies and Gentlemen, you would all agree with me that, as things stand today, this part of Danquah’s agenda remains unfinished.

PRESS AND OTHER FREEDOMS

Today, Ghana has a vibrant press and media. In 1930, Danquah set up the Gold Coast’s first successful daily newspaper, the West African Times, subsequently the Times of West Africa. In his day, he was a fearless critic of Government. At the time of Danquah’s death, there were only a handful of newspapers; the majority were owned by either the State or the CPP and sang the praises of the Government of the Day and President Nkrumah.

Currently, there are nearly 300 radio stations in Ghana, 31 TV stations and about the same number of political newspapers out there every day, including some that seem to be better informed of my medical records than even my doctor and I.

Danquah believed in the freedom of the press and of the individual and went to great lengths to defend these freedoms at a time when many did not think the ordinary people deserved such freedoms.

In a rejoinder to an article written by an Oxford Professor in the Gold Coast Observer on September 2nd, 1948, Danquah stated: “The people of the U.K are happier than the people of this Ghana because of the former’s opportunity to let off steam periodically in general elections. Give Ghana a constitution that affords the Ghanaian an opportunity to let off steam in an ordered periodic manner”. Today, we have such a Constitution, which supports our freedom to vote out a government which we consider bad and vote in a better alternative.

I know that there are some who still harbour the notion that governments would perform better if not encumbered with press and individual freedoms.

Yet, the freedoms we are enjoying cannot be blamed for the economic hardships that we are enduring. Ghana’s economy did not shrink in 2014 because of the criticisms that the President and his team of economic managers suffered at the hands of the opposition, trade unions, religious groups, the media or civil society, as a whole.

Our freedoms have nothing to do with a government that happens to be incompetent at governing. In fact, our freedoms must rather act as a check on the excesses of a poor government. It is, therefore, my submission that Ghana now is closer to the Ghana Danquah fought and died for: a nation of freedom. But, we are not there yet. God knows we are not there yet. This is just the beginning. And, I say so as a patriot of incurable optimism. 60 years is but a short time in the life of a country. Our forefathers, indeed, dreamed of a country of freedom, liberty, opportunities, progress and prosperity. That Ghana is still very much a work in progress.

SOCIAL JUSTICE & ENTERPRISE

Danquah believed in social justice and individual enterprise. He stated that the purpose of governmental action should be to enhance “the life, liberty and property of each and every citizen”. This meant giving every Ghanaian the opportunity to help build and own, exclusively, part of the country’s wealth. And on several occasions he stood up for the right of the citizen. When land was being sourced for the Tema Harbour in 1952, the government of the day acquired far more acres than it would need simply because it didn’t want people to make money on selling their own land. Danquah was incredulous and stated in the Legislative Assembly: “Mr. Speaker, he (Ansah Koi) said that if Government acquired a small area for the port, all the land in the neighbourhood would rise in value and individuals would come in and benefit by it and therefore the Government must take the whole area to prevent the individual from acquiring property and benefiting from the development.”

We certainly have a lot of unfinished business in setting out our economy to allow the enterprising individual to prosper. The unfinished agenda requires that we move away from the times when big government did everything, to a future when people are entrusted with self-governance. It means following the wisdom of our forefathers by moulding our economic system to suit our particular instincts for individual freedom and social justice.

Danquah criticised the state capitalist model, which was, ironically, relying on revenues raised from the toil of individual, private cocoa farmers of Ghanaian origin. He was clear in his mind that a welfare state could be created with a free market. To him, “the main purpose of a liberal government is to order things as to release the energies of the people for free and great endeavours in every field of life, and not merely in the gathering and eating of food.”

LEADERSHIP

Back then, Danquah recognised that the main drawback to progress in Africa was the lack of good leadership. He remarked then to an English politician, “whether black, brown, olive or white, we are all human beings, all equal, and could really have it good if properly led.” I, therefore, submit, Mr Chairman, that the old quest for proper leadership remains in Ghana today a critical part of Danquah’s unfinished agenda.

And what Danquah said some 60 years ago about the state of leadership in the Gold Coast resonates today: “Up and down the country the picture is dismal almost anywhere, and when the people of this country ask for a change in the form of Government, what they mean is that that dismal form of administration should be brought to an end.”

Danquah pushed for a Ghana where we choose a leader with an agenda that can lead to a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous nation. I am confident that Ghana is on the way up to the Danquah ideal; the kind of competitive politics where propaganda will lose its inflated value, and where voting purely on ethnic lines will become as unrewarding as living with no dignity.

CORRUPTION

It is sad that one other sphere of public life on which Danquah spent a lot of his energies remains very much a problem in our country today. Danquah abhorred the misuse of public money under any circumstance. In his day, his typewriter was always handy to write letters to those in authority in Ghana and beyond to see that some wrong was righted. He argued passionately that public money ought to be managed by people who were committed to the country’s interests. He declared in the Legislative Assembly one day: “If you are going to entrust public money to persons who are not going to be honest, and who are going to yield to bribery and corruption and who are going to allow themselves to be influenced, then you are not doing good to the country.”

I wonder what he would have made of WOYOME, GYEEDA, SUBAH AND SADA and all the reports of the blatant appropriation of public money for private ends today.

One thing I can assure you though, Ladies and Gentlemen, if Danquah were alive today, President John Mahama would be receiving letters or more probably emails from him all the time and so would the Minister of Finance on how the country’s resources should be put to better use! As he wrote to Prime Minister Nkrumah on November 4, 1959, “This country can only prove itself fit to govern itself if those primarily charged with that governance first set the supreme example of incorruptibility.”

We need to strengthen the institutional mechanisms for dealing with corruption to promote this end. Above all, we need the personal examples of our political leaders, especially the President of the Republic, to demonstrate that public service is exactly that, public service. Those who seek wealth in public service have no place there. Their place is in the private sector where the making of money is a legitimate and necessary activity.

NATIONAL PRIDE AND PATRIOTISM

Danquah loved Ghana. In 1936, when he had completed his research into the name ‘Ghana’ to replace the Gold Coast, he wrote a poem, “I love a woman”, and its last verse reads:

“A black woman

Golden is her personal name,

Guinea’s Golden Lady,

And christened by her God-fathers

But from birth,

Ghana”

He believed Ghana was capable of being as good as any other country on earth as long as its citizens applied themselves and excelled in their chosen endeavours. And he believed it was up to the Ghanaian to develop Ghana and every citizen had a role to play in this regard. A few months after launching the UGCC, he declared in the Legislative Council “We must find a way to make our country live as a force and the force must be self- generated and generative –indigenous, so to speak.”

He had no doubt that Ghanaians could make a special contribution to the growth of world civilisation. This is what motivated him to write the first Twi play, “Nyankonsem”, and to contribute to theological debate in his now critically acclaimed work, “The Akan Doctrine of God”. Our and future generations must continue to be inspired by his example.

Danquah loved Ghana. There are hundreds in this room, and millions out there, inside our borders and outside, who share this love for the place where all of us feel completely at home. What is that ultimate statement of patriotism? Most people would say: “My country, right or wrong!” In fact, as the distinguished orator and senator Carl Shurz elaborated: “My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right.”

That was Danquah’s belief. That should be our purpose. When we make the wrong choices, we must act to set things right. When those put in charge of running the affairs of state get it wrong we must have the courage, the humanity and the selflessness to say so. That is our patriotic duty. We must continue this part of the agenda.

DANQUAH ON AFRICA

Anyone who sets out to read up on Danquah is bound to discover a lot of surprises; you would discover that the official political history of Ghana has been economical with the truth. Nowhere more so than in the area of African unity. Danquah was not against the integration of Africa as his detractors may want us to believe. As a founding member and 1st president of the West African Students Union (WASU) in 1922, he understood perfectly the essence in linking up the mass of nationalist intellects across borders for the common struggle for liberation and economic empowerment. Having also studied at the feet of the great Casely Hayford, his mentor, who founded West Africa’s first nationalist movement, the National Congress of British West Africa, he was also familiar with the collective quest for the people of the region to be free. To him, the strength of regional unity meant having viable parts. Danquah foresaw the wider objective of unity, whether West African or African, as being better fulfilled by first making Ghana work as a role model.

That is why he was adamant that Ghanaians must concentrate first on getting Ghana right. In Professor SKB Asante's 2007 J B Danquah Memorial Lectures, he referred to a telling incident. At a meeting of the Working Committee of the UGCC, to confirm Nkrumah’s employment as the General Secretary of the nationalist movement, on 29 December 1947, Danquah cautioned his younger colleague, "This is a Gold Coast national movement" and not a "West African movement; to bring all these people together is not an easy thing. We want to concentrate on making the Gold Coast a nation to serve as the base for launching the liberation of the rest of West Africa. Are you prepared to accept our policy?" He was soon proved right, when Ghana’s role as the first West African state to gain independence inspired a domino of independence victories across the West African region within three years.

I have no doubt that, today, he would approve strongly our policy and determination to make of the West African regional community, ECOWAS, a genuine regional market. Already a market of some 350 million people, with the potential of 500 million people by 2035, i.e. in 20 years time, can provide immense opportunities for Ghanaian enterprise and ingenuity. We have every interest in taking the lead to realise the goal of regional integration.

ENHANCING GOVERNANCE AND ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT

Anyone who claims Danquah’s inheritance must necessarily undertake his passionate belief in the proper running of this country. Two things stand out in stark relief from our recent history, especially for those of us in the NPP who have the solid foundation of good governance of the Kufuor era on which to build.

We have as a matter of urgency to redress the balance of power in the one-sided relationship between the Executive and the Legislature; that is between the President and the Parliament, so that we can enhance the capacity of Parliament to exercise effectively its oversight responsibilities over and control of the public purse. The reckless expenditure of recent years demands it.

Secondly, to realise Danquah’s oft-cited goal of policy that will release the energies of the people, the time is ripe to take democratic principles fully into local governance. Local officials must become accountable to their local electorates. District Chief Executives should be directly elected if need be on partisan lines, just like Members of Parliament and the President. It will strengthen local self-confidence and initiative.

As the presidential candidate of the NPP, I have been asked what the first priority of an Akufo-Addo government would be and my answer was straight to the point: bring back macro-economic stability to the management of the economy. Without it, all our efforts will get down to naught. Danquah realised this long ago and I should at this stage share another of Danquah’s sayings from the Legislative Council with you. He is talking here about the Colonial Government’s management of the economy. “Now I say, Sir, that the Government has been extravagant in the manner of handling the country’s finances because never once does it seem to consider the question of the country’s economy. The very word economy appears to have disappeared completely from the dictionary and vocabulary of the present Government.”

Does this in any way, Ladies and Gentlemen, sound familiar?

Petrol prices remain high today, only because our government did not have the competence to keep our currency stable. We can’t afford to buy crude oil to power our lights because of the high cost of buying the dollar in an economy saddled with suffocating national debt. And this is at a time when the world price of crude oil has fallen drastically. And, we all know what high fuel prices mean even to the Ghanaian who does not own a car. Such is the situation that £1, which was exchanging for GH¢1.75 in December 2008 is now fetching GH¢5. Such is the situation that the price of kerosene, which was GH¢3.15 per gallon when the NPP handed over power in January 2009, is GH¢13.14 per gallon today.

We need to bring back confidence in the economy so that businesses and families can plan their budgets properly. What the NPP will do differently is that we will bring back that confidence. We will ensure fiscal discipline on how taxpayers’ monies are spent and ensure macroeconomic stability. Investors, domestic and foreign, will only be interested in Ghana when they can be assured of the bankability of investing in our economy. We will move away from high budget deficits and reckless borrowing because we know of the benefits of fiscal responsibility – low inflation, reduced interest rates, exchange rate stability, avoiding HIPC and making savings for social and capital expenditure.

Danquah chastised the Colonial Government for its penchant of always looking to taxation as a means of raising revenue for the State. “This government has been very careless of the highest public interest. They do not seem to care who is to be taxed or who is not to be taxed, so long as the people pay the tax and the money flows in.” Recent taxes on condoms and cutlasses come readily to mind.

We must move away from focusing on taxation to finance high deficits to a focus on production. This means providing incentives (including tax incentives) to enhance production and reducing the cost of doing business. We have to speed up the policy of linking every Ghanaian to an address on a national database to help us plan properly and spread thinner and wider the burden of raising taxes.

To say that Danquah was way ahead of his time in his thinking and approach to life is to say the obvious. He saw the need for Ghana to build an economy that was self-reliant and to move away from being a primary producer. Here he is, in a statement he made to the Legislative Council on roads and bridges in 1949, and I am not quite sure how many of us today look at infrastructure in such a comprehensive manner:

“Frankly neither Roads and Bridges nor Water Supplies nor Social Welfare can be said to be wealth-producing in the sense that Adam Smith would speak of the wealth of a nation. No doubt roads and bridges for transportation of goods are a means to the production of wealth, but if these roads are used only for importing and transporting imported consumer goods in what sense can they be said to be wealth-producing?”

I was excited to discover that Danquah had a dream, before Nkrumah returned from his studies abroad, of developing the Volta Basin not only for light, water and power but also to exploit its vast mineral resources to benefit the people of Ghana. This is the question he posed to the Colonial Secretary at Question Time in the Legislative Council on September 17th, 1947: “Dr Danquah: Would Government consider the appointment of a National Committee to enquire into the possibilities of a Volta Basin Corporation to develop the resources of the river for light, water and power, and to exploit for public benefit the vast mineral resources of the Volta Basin?” “Colonial Secretary: In the present circumstances, no Sir.” A few years later, he argued unsuccessfully against the Nkrumah Government negotiating a deal for the Volta Basin Project that would not include the exploitation of Ghana’s bauxite for the proposed aluminum smelting plant. We have a lot of work to do to exploit our mineral resources and add value to them. In much the same way, we would be following in Danquah’s path when we add value to our petrochemicals and bauxite resources. Adding value to these resources, manufacturing, i.e. making things, developing the appropriate skills of our population – these are the paths to our future prosperity and jobs for our youth. We have to travel down them and do so now, not tomorrow, not the day after tomorrow, but now.

CONCLUSION

Even though Danquah never exercised executive authority in the State, his influence on Ghanaian history has been truly astonishing and can be felt in virtually all areas of our national life – constitutional, cultural, economic, intellectual, political and religious. Several key institutions of our country owe their origin directly to his work – the Cocoa Marketing Board; the University of Ghana, Legon; the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi; the Bank of Ghana; Ghana Commercial Bank; and Accra Sports Stadium, amongst others.

Despite the passionate controversies that engulfed his life, he remained remarkably free of personal animus and hatreds. A memorable occasion arose when, soon after his release from his first period of detention in 1962, he decided, much against the advice of family and friends, to present himself, as a founding member of the Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences, at the ceremony marking the award by the then Soviet State of the Lenin Peace Prize to President Kwame Nkrumah. He found no difficulty in exchanging pleasantries at the event with the man who had until recently been his gaoler, because to him the award was an honour for all Ghanaians, and not just Nkrumah. He thought his presence was necessary to make that point.

We need to take a cue from him. It is time that we moved on from the understandable bitterness that continues to fill the hearts of many who love his work and contribution because of the cruel circumstances of his death. Let me, on behalf of lovers of Danquah, especially his family of which I am proud to be one, use this occasion, which commemorates the 50th anniversary of his tragic death, to forego all feelings of bitterness and to say unreservedly to Kwame Nkrumah, his family and his supporters that we forgive what took place on that day. Let us promote a spirit of reconciliation between all of us for the sake of Mother Ghana, her progress and prosperity.

Gregarious and charismatic personality with a compelling presence, he was a man of exceptional charm and wit. Great lover of life, he was drawn to all things fine and beautiful. Indeed, the women he married at different stages of his life – Mabel Dove, Comfort Carboo and finally Elizabeth Varden – were all hailed as amongst the great beauties of their age. That was him – only the best was good enough.

In a petition Danquah sent to President Nkrumah a few weeks before his death in detention, he composed a poem, “A Song of Glory” which befits the theme of this lecture, “Danquah – the Unfinished Agenda”. The verse reads:

“Glorious Ghana, arise and shine

Thy star and thy eight regions’ stars,

Arise and shine, with God’s guidance,

To crown thy spheres of high command

We praise and sing “hurrah hurrah”

For Ghana’s glory of the past,

Today’s challenge is greater still,

Arise, with energy, to gain that glory.”

So it was that his beloved widow, Elizabeth Danquah, made the following inscription on his tombstone:

“Not lost, but gone before and departing, leaves footprints in the sands of time”

May God continue to bless him.

Joseph Kwame Kyeretwere Boakye Danquah, your place in the Ghanaian pantheon is secure. The Ghanaian people, whom you so loved, will never forget you.

Rest in perfect peace.

God bless Ghana, God bless Africa!!

Source: Nana Addo-Dankwa Akufo-Addo

No comments

Dr. J.B Danquah's last letter to Kwame Nkrumah

Details

Category: Letters & Emails

Created on Thursday, 05 February 2015 00:00

Hits: 4612

Dr. J.B Danquah's last letter to Kwame Nkrumah

After waiting for a while without receiving any reply to his petition against his detention to the President and the Government, Dr Danquah wrote another letter on 8th January, 1965, entitled “Demand for immediate release and opportunity for offer of amends.” In the letter, Dr Danquah challenged the legality of his imprisonment, and asked for his immediate release, and held the President and his Ministers, “you, jointly and severally, or by any one else on your behalf”, responsible for what seemed like a grand scheme for his demise and demanded damages.

“The situation so created by the President’s failure or disinclination to allow me to removed to a Hospital, together with the fact that I am not entitled to be attended by a medical man of my own choosing, tends to confirm the growing conviction that at the bottom of my imprisonment lurks an attempt or desire to damage my physical body and my mental equipment, even the salvation of my soul, –– or that those responsible for my imprisonment do not care if I experience such damage.”

He continued, “There is no such power in you, gentlemen, to commit me to prison on charges triable by the Courts of Justice. You have made an egregious and rather very damaging mistake against me, and I hereby advise and request for my release… Your Excellency and Gentlemen.” Ending with this PS: “I celebrated my 69th birthday in Prison 218 days ago, on 21st December, 1964. I am now moving rapidly to my 70th birthday. Wish me luck.”

After this, Dr Danquah penned his final letter to President Nkrumah, 12 days before he died. As noted by his contemporary and biographer, L H Ofoso-Appiah, J B’s last letter to Nkrumah was meant to be an apology, but was not much different from all previous letters. It was written because his wife had complained to him during a visit on 20th January, 1965, that his letters had annoyed Dr Nkrumah and had made him decide against releasing Dr Danquah. Mrs Danquah would not tell him how she got to know that Nkrumah was angry with her husband, but insisted that all such letters from Danquah should cease. “J B was naturally upset that he had caused his wife so much unhappiness,” Prof Ofosu-Appiah writes, “but he could not bring himself to admit that he had done anything wrong. He was also upset that his wife had not received a copy of that letter of demand.”

The last letter to the President reads as follows:

“SPECIAL BLOCK”,

NSAWAM PRISON,

NSAWAM, GHANA.

23rd January 1965,

His Excellency,

Dr Kwame Nkrumah, P.C., etc.,

President of the Republic of Ghana

Office of the Government of Ghana,

Accra, Ghana

Dear Dr. Nkrumah,

My wife paid me a visit at the Prison here on Wednesday, January 20th – the first after an absence of two months and three weeks. Naturally, I was greatly happy to see her, but she was not herself very happy.

She appeared distressed over what she described as annoying letters from me to Your Excellency. She said on Christmas Eve, December 24th, Mr. William Ofori Atta was released from detention with some five or six others; that she heard my name had been on the list of those to be released that day. It was afterwards struck out probably struck out probably because of my annoying letters. I tried to explain the position to her, pointing out that my letter to you in November, or just before Christmas, had been on the subject of my health and that the Medical Officer here had recommended my removal to Hospital, but that you had rejected that recommendation for my removal to Hospital, and I therefore tried to impress upon her mind that my life was exposed to the danger of death.

To this my wife gave a fitting reply that I should not let such thoughts worry me, but that if God had not designed that I should die here, death would never overtake me in this Prison. Indeed, under the stress of her sense of distress over my conduct towards you, and under the stress of my own sense of distress that injustice was being meted out to me, it was difficult for our talk to be amiable or cordial, and tempers therefore rose.

Eventually I told her that I had recently written a letter to you and your Cabinet Ministers demanding my immediate release and the offer of amends by you and the Government for the damage caused by my imprisonment, and that I had asked in my letter to the Government that a copy of it should be sent to her, and I wanted to know whether she had received such a copy.

At this my wife’s anger flared up again, and she told me that no such letter had reached her, but that information had reached her that my last letter to you had greatly annoyed and upset Your Excellency. She added that “Today everybody was frightened in Ghana and that it would be better for me to keep quiet and trust in God than to upset your Excellency with strong letters”. She disclosed that Mr. da Rocha had gone and seen her in connection with my letter asking him to call and visit me. He had told her that I had myself explored all avenues in respect of this law of detention, and that it was difficult to know what else anyone could do in the matter, but that, in any case, he, Mr. da Rocha, had applied for permission to visit me at the Prison here, but that permission had not been granted him to make such a visit.

Upon all these, tears flowed down the eyes of my wife, and I realised that her sense of distress was overpowering.

In respect of my suggestion to her some time ago that she should call and see Your Excellency with some elderly persons, led by Nana Sir Tsibu Darku, she explained that her application to you for the purpose had not been granted. I then asked her for some information as to who had accompanied her in her interview with you in October last year, but to this she shortly replied: ‘I wouldn’t tell you’.

In fact I have never seen Elizabeth in such a petulant temper against me before, and I became greatly disturbed. I asked her to call and see me next week as I wished to consider my position and to straighten matters up with Your Excellency.

Speaking personally, Your Excellency must be aware that despite some great political differences between us, especially as affecting the present Republican Constitution for the adoption, or non-adoption of which, I stood against you for the Presidency, I have never had a personal quarrel with you, and that all my letters to you since my detention in January last year have been couched in the most respectful terms with due respect to your position as President of the State and also, in view of what, at least on the surface, appears to be a friendly atmosphere in which we both live.

May I, in this connection, recall that my first petition of the 21st May, 1964 for my release on cultural and humanitarian grounds, laid much stress on the fact of what we both held in the reverence and believed in common, Africa and the greatness of Ghana. I urged upon you in that letter that to enable me to continue my cultural contribution to these great ideals, it was useless keeping me in prison, kicking my heels away from the work I love, my profession, my duty to my family and children, and the books and the learned societies which help the advancement of these imperishable ideals.

I much regret to say I was not honoured with any reply from you to this letter, despite its great human and scholarly appeal.

My next petition, in order of time, but first in order of importance, was the one dated the 12th of June, in which I set out the entire course of my life and ‘activities’, from June 1962, when I came out of the first detention, to January 4th, 1964, when I was again arrested. And I believe I made a case in that letter which, looked at fairly and squarely, what the Government of Ghana, with Your Excellency as the head, should have done for me was to send a distinguished national delegation to thank me for my contribution to the nation’s wealth of thought, culture and progress, instead of sending against me hostile troops of the Ghana Army to invade me and destroy my home life as if I was the greatest felon and the vilest enemy of our beloved land.

To this letter, too, I received no reply of any kind, except that on the 15th August the Assistant Director of Prisons came to my cell and read to me a letter received by him from the Government to the effect that my petition was receiving the attention or ‘consideration’ of Government.

That was five months ago, and up to now, what the ‘consideration’ led to has not been communicated to me. In fact, it was never made clear to me to what ‘petition’ that letter of the Ghana Government referred, whether the cultural petition of 21st May, or the petition of representations of the 12th June.

My last letter of representation was dated 30th November and must have reached you early in December. In fact, on Christmas day I received a message from the Director of Prisons, through the A.D.P., that that petition had been sent to you. It was that petition which dealt with the vital question of my life as endangered here, and I asked for my immediate release or removal to the hospital as recommended by the Medical authorities here.

This letter was also treated with a silence, a lack of reply or response, which simply astonished me.

My last communication is the one on 8th January, the one which appears to have greatly upset my wife and to have led her to overcome her reluctance to visit me at Nsawam, owing to the unpleasant feelings it gives her. On this occasion she traveled all the way to Nsawam, 20 miles or so, to see me because she had been upset by my annoying you.

This last letter, was of course, not a ‘representation’ or a petition. It was a lawyer’s letter of demand on the grounds that my detention was illegal and that I should be released immediately and an offer of amends made my you, your Ministers and the Government of Ghana for the horrible damage you and they have caused me, including the breaking-up of my home, the damage to my legal profession and to all the great values I hold dear for Ghana and the world, as well as, of course, as to my family.

I received a reply promptly to this letter, but it contained no offer of amends nor of any expression of regret for the damage done me.

The reply was read to me by the Assistant Director of Prisons on the 15th January. It went off at a tangent to inform me that after my arrest and detention in January 1964, the Parliament of Ghana had passed a new amendment to the Preventive Detention Act to the effect that a person detained would have no right to make ‘representations’ to any person or persons other than the President who ordered his detention.

I was astonished by the contents of this letter and I asked for a copy to enable me to reply to same, but both requests were turned down on the ground that copies of the letters are not supplied, and that no replies to such letters are permitted either.

So far as I know, neither the Government of Ghana, nor the Parliament of Ghana, or the Courts of Justice are ‘persons’ in the sense in which Kwame Botwe is a person. Each of these is an institution an “it” and not a ‘he’ or ‘she’, and I cannot therefore see how my letter of demand dated 8th January in the category of ‘representation’ to any person other than the President. Under the Constitution, the President has a Cabinet of persons who, together with him, constitute the Executive of the Government of Ghana , with collective responsibility, and they together, as constituting an ‘it’, are not ‘private persons’, but are parts of an institution- the GOVERNMENT OF GHANA.

To digress here a little. Another letter read to me on the same occasion was that from a man I do not know at all but who claimed that I had made a ‘complaint’ to him of my being chained or put in leg irons by some warders here. He went on to say that he had enquired into the ‘complaint’ and had ‘dismissed’ the same for want of ‘evidence’.

I was greatly shocked by this because apart from my wife, Elizabeth, who saw the hospital bandage on my left thumb during her visit here in July, and also the A.D.P. (Mr. Baiden) who, on seeing the bandage on my hand in July or August, asked for the cause of it, no one in the entire world, other than the Medical Officer and his Nurses, had cared to ask me how the sprain came about. The only person to whom I made a real complaint, Mr. Sagoe, Superintendent of the Special Block, took no particular notice of it, except that he examined the sprain on my thumb and the scratches on my left leg, and reported the matter to the Doctor. So far as I know he made no report of it to the A.D.P until Mr. Baiden himself enquired of it from me.

How then came this person who is, apparently, not a Magistrate and has no jurisdiction in assault and battery cases at Nsawam, to such a brutal decision to dismiss the ‘complaint’ for want of ‘evidence’, when the merest inspection or X-ray of the affected parts, quite apart from verbal evidence of some living persons, could easily establish the case? Queer Justice!

Here, again, I applied to get a copy of the letter from the person who dismissed my ‘complaint’, but again I was told that neither a copy nor a reply was permissible to me. One may recall here, on this question of justice, that it was our people’s love for justice that compelled them to ask the British in 1843 to come back to Ghana, a situation which led to the Bond of 1844. The British people, like the Dutch and the Portuguese, had left the country in 1828, for quite a number of reasons, including military, but our people’s love of British justice as administered by Capt. George Maclean, compelled our ancestors to welcome the return of the British. Now the people have gone away from us only some seven years ago, in 1957, and already some people are asking in regard to certain incidents, ‘Is this justice?’

These events of the Assistant Director of Prisons reading two letters to me, and refusing me copies by reason of the prevailing rules, happened on the 15th and 16th January, it was four days later, on the 20th January, that my wife’s visit took place, and what happened between us, I have narrated as faithfully as I can above.

Your Excellency: you will appreciate that the whole of my existence and the entire course of my career for 69 years have been put in jeopardy by the present detention which is absolutely baseless. Therefore I have no alternative but to seek to defend my existence and my career and the interests of my country, Ghana, whom I love, and of my family, wife and children who are very dear to me.

If therefore in the course of my demand for right, freedom and justice, in my legal letter of 8th January, 1965, I said anything which annoyed you personally, or which was not other than a lawyer’s language to make a clear demand for what he is entitled to in law, in perfect pursuit of right, freedom and justice, then I most sincerely and most unreservedly apologise to Your Excellency for the untoward language.

My wife’s distress over her own feeling that I appear to have hurt Your Excellency is quite understandable for she, like many of our countrymen, is frightened of the situation today, where our country, which formerly did not know of seditions, not to mention treasons, is now fully of interminable treason trials and numerous number of secret detentions over which no one seems to have any remedy but to capitulate and to pray earnestly that God may one day be pleased to save Ghana from this curse.

I am persuaded that your concern for the happiness of my wife, as it must be for the wife of every detainee, must be real, otherwise, I do not see how my wife could have learnt of my letter having annoyed you, and to follow it up with a special visit to me 12 days later, on the 20th January, the date of the letter being 8th January.

I do not pretend to guess how she got to know that you had been greatly upset by that letter, but in order that her mind should be completely eased on that score. I respectfully ask you, in the name of all that you hold dear, even in the name of God, to assist my wife by complying with the request in my letter that a copy of that letter of 8th January 1965 should be sent her by your Government. I feel certain that if she gets the letter and reads it and becomes informed that I am seeking her interest in that letter, so that either when I am alive, or when I am rendered incapable of acting for myself by any fatality, such as death or insanity, there will be legitimate provision to stabilise her in life and enable her to sustain me in her memory.

She, has, indeed, assured me that unless it be God’s will I would never die in this Prison, and this is a conviction which I am myself persuaded to share strongly. But there is nothing like making provision against unexpected possibilities.

I therefore earnestly appeal to you to provide my wife with a copy of my letter to you and your Government, so that when she calls to see me next Wednesday the 17th January, 1965 (she expressed her preference to call again in a fortnight’s time, that is 3rd February), we, that is, she and I, should be in a position to start on a common ground for an amicable discussion and avoid recriminations, in particular, as affecting your Excellency personally.

I do hope also, Sir, that you will feel persuaded to supply her with a copy of this letter also. And with my warm regards.

Believe me to be,

Your Excellency,

Yours very sincerely and obediently,

(Sgd.) J. B. DANQUAH

On 29th January 1965, six days after writing the above letter, J B was seen by a Psychiatrist who stated that apart from Hypertension of 220/120 there was nothing significant. On 4th February 1965, he was dead. The Prison Commission Report states: “On the 4th February 1965, at 6:10 a.m., following normal routine, Dr. J. B. Danquah was unlocked and escorted to the end of the corridor to take his bath at 6:20 a.m. On returning to his cell, he found, apparently, that his cell had been thoroughly searched and some of his things, including his Bible, were on the floor. He lost his temper and began to abuse the warder. This brought on a heart attack and he collapsed and died. The Medical evidence during the period January 1965 up to the time of his death is of interest.”

According to L H Ofosu-Appiah, “The news of Danquah’s death came as a shock to most people. But to Nkrumah and his prison doctors and staff it could not have been unexpected, since the medical reports show that there was a determination to prove that Danquah was malingering. The fact that only foreign medical doctors were used for treating detainees is enough evidence that the callousness was deliberate. Even the greatest of Nkrumah’s admirers, after reading through the evidence, will admit that he willed Danquah’s death and got it. But if he did not feel any pity while Danquah was suffering, he at least felt ashamed after his death. For Mr. Koi Larbi, a barrister-at-law, and one of the detainees, states that after Danquah’s death better food was given to them, and those who complained of ill-health were admitted to the prison hospital.

“There was a regulation that dead detainees should be buried where they died. Nkrumah did not have the courage to apply that ruling to J.B. But the normal procedure of holding a post-mortem examination and an inquest were dispensed with. Instead, relations were informed that they could take the corpse away for burial; and Mr. William Ofori tta carried out all the formalities required by the Prison Regulations and took the corpse away at 7:55 p.m. on February 4, 1965. The cavalier manner in which an inquest was dispensed with arouses suspicion, especially since the Medical Officer was a non-Ghanaian called Dr. R. Negovetic,” Prof. Ofosu-Appiah wrote in his book ‘The Life and Times of J B Danquah’, (1974).

Source: Danquah Institute

No comments

The life and sacrifice of a nationalist by Mike Oquaye

Details

Category: Special Reports

Created on Wednesday, 04 February 2015 00:00

Hits: 4019

The life and sacrifice of a nationalist

By Professor Mike Oquaye

Energy

Danquah knew the role of energy/power generation in the socio-economic development of Ghana. The Hansard of the Legislative Council 1947, capturing herein as advocating in the Legislative Body as follows during Question Time:

“Dr .Danquah: Would Government consider the appointment of a National Committee to enquire into the possibilities of a Volta Basin Corporation to develop the resources of the river for light, water and power, and to exploit for public benefit the vast mineral resources of the Volta Basin? Colonial Secretary: In present circumstances, No, Sir”. [i]

What he told the colonial government, Danquah repeated in 1953 when Dr. Kwame Nkrumah was Leader of Government Business:

“I have been thinking of the Volta as a great national asset long before political parties were formed in this country, long before even this national movement for liberation was started by old George Grant and long before the present Government came into power”. [ii]

Danquah advocated in 1947, the establishment of a Volta Basin Corporation (VBC) to generate electricity for Ghana! Dr. Nkrumah had the opportunity to execute this after independence and named the organisation Volta River Authority (VRA).

Danquah was the progenitor of extensive hydro-generation of power as part of his development vision for the new Ghana he had clearly perceived. He deserves his due in terms of appreciation.

The Legislator/M.P.

Danquah perceived bold and fearless M.Ps. who will stick to their principles; who have studied matters before the House and will stand unintimidated. This is what is expected of true and worthy representatives of the people.

On being accused of delaying a bill “in an attempt to raise passions” by then Minister of Justice, Sir Patrick Branigan, Dr. Danquah spoke boldly as a true African who could match the Whites boot for boot. He never was a colonial stooge. He could never have collaborated with “imperialists” against his own people. Danquah said:

“Mr. Chairman, I had been serving my country for 25 years before this man came. Go to Ireland. Your people are being used as slaves by the British. Go and save your people. You have no right to come here and interfere with my freedom. I sit down to bear all these things not because I cannot speak but because I have respect for the Chair. Go and save your country! I am interested in this Bill because I am a public man and I have got to use my time and energy to the best of my ability to stand here and fight, and I will fight honestly and sincerely, never minding what you say. I believe that this clause is wrong for 2 reasons and I will press for the amendment. If the Government turns it down, it is left to them, but the Minister of Justice must not come here and call names. Go to Ireland”. [iii]

Danquah obviously wanted a House of Parliament with real dignity both in form and in deed. He perceived an “inspirational” edifice, and, of course, together with its furniture depicting Ghana’s dignity and not advertising Chinese seats etc.

“In constructing a Parliamentary House, the general intention is to set up a building of a first-class standard as a memorial of the achievements of that particular country, and as a symbol or an inspiration for future generations.

…we want somebody who will be able to create inspiration; we want to see African spirit in this building, a Gold Coast Design into this particular building.

So I suggest… that the Government should withdraw this particular motion and agree to submit this matter to the Gold Coast African and to the entire world for designs to be submitted…”[iv]

Great detail as Danquah did. This is the essence of Parliamentary oversight of government financial estimates and ultimate expenditure.

MPs Vigilance

When the 1949 Budget Statement was presented, J.B. Danquah discovered that some items in the budget had been put there for the sake of being put there.

“How is it that this Government is so fond of foisting upon the country last-minute programmes hastily brought together and ill-digested? The explanation, of course, is simple: this government appears to have lost its grip on things: this government is sick of governing the people… Frankly, neither Roads and Bridges nor Water Supplies nor Social Welfare can be said to be wealth-producing in the sense that Adam Smith would speak of the wealth of a nation. No doubt roads and bridges for transportation of goods are a means to the production of wealth, but if these roads are used only for importing and transporting imported consumer goods in what sense can they be said to be wealth-producing? …We feel that the time has come to call a halt, to take stock and make an end of all new and hastily thought out commitments. This is a time that tests and tries men’s hearts.This is a time when an inefficient Government which has lost its grip must cease to tamper and to tinker with the destinies of a country the control and direction of which must soon pass out of their hands into the hands of the people and their Chiefs”. [v]

Danquah exemplified the need for careful scrutiny by MPs in all fiscal matters, “Now I say, Sir, that the Government has been extravagant in the manner of handling the country’s finances because never once does it seem to consider the question of the country’s economy. The very word economy appears to have disappeared completely from the dictionary and vocabulary of the present Government. This government has been very careless of the highest public interest. They do not seem to care who is to be taxed or who is not to be taxed, so long as the people pay the tax and the money flows in. So careless a government has proposed a series of taxes for this Budget Session, and it must be condemned as having outlived its day and the earlier it clears out, the better for this country. What we want is a Government in touch with the very life of their people, the sorrows, their groanings, their wants, their sufferings and their grievances and until we get that government this country, we will forever continue to agitate and demand for a better Government”. [vi]

The Opposition

One the role of the Opposition, Danquah had clear views which he passionately advocated: “I would like to make it clear that, although it is part of the game of politics for an Opposition to obstruct and criticize the Government and to take the maximum advantage of the Government’s mistakes so as to advance the Opposition’s own positive policy, the present Opposition does not intend to play that game unless compelled to do so by attempts on the part of the Government, if I may quote Laksi, “to do the worst possible things in the worst possible way”. Criticism is the salt of politics and we must not be afraid of it. It will indeed be dangerous if Government relied merely on its majority as its chief instrument of government.

We are not in a stage of siege but in a stage of freedom. The chief strength of the Opposition lies not so much in its numbers as in its quality. I am anxious that the Opposition should be strong not only to put the Government on its mettle, but to avoid slackness in our habits in this house and to ensure a regularity of attendance, as many members of the Government side taking as much pains as others in the Opposition do” [vii]

Education

Danquah was passionate about education. To him, every Ghanaian should be given opportunity to attain the highest possible educational level. When the colonial administration, outdoored a plan to build ONE University to cater for the whole of West Africa at Ibadan, Nigeria, Danquah was vehemently opposed to the idea. He spoke against it on platforms and wrote condemning it in his newspaper publications. At the Legislature, he was most vocal. He said inter alia;

“…The Gold Coast is not Nigeria and never could be! Achimota is not Yaba or Ibadan and never could be…Sir, there are nations in Africa as there are nations in Europe. There are peoples among Black Africans as well as there are peoples among Europeans. You cannot expect to build a successful University in Andalusia in Spain with its Moslem foundations for the education of the people of Oxfordshire in England with its feudal background; for the English are not Spanish, nor the Spanish English. So it must be everywhere, among every people, whether in West Africa or Western Europe.

Sir, for purely cultural reasons, I conceive that the Gold Coast “a proud little country with a good reason for being proud”, will never, can never and shall never be proud of a University situated at Ibadan and not at Achimota. And for this reason alone, this superlative cultural reason, I support the motion for a committee to be set up your Excellency to look carefully into Despatch No.169 and to make recommendations, recommendations to suit our Gold Coast tradition, our Achimota tradition!” [viii]

At the end, Danquah’s viewpoint carried the day. The University College of the Gold Coast was established in Achimota and the University acknowledges him as the Father of the University of Ghana and father of University education in Ghana.

On the Judicious Use of Public Funds

“I think that the existence of Parliament or Assembly is to look after public money. That is our first duty and I am surprised to see Ministers of high rank crying “shame, shame”, when they have committed mistakes and we are trying to point it out that they have been careless”. [ix]

“If you are going to entrust public money to persons who are not going to be honest, and who are going to yield to bribery and corruption and who are going to allow themselves to be influenced, then you are not doing good to the country”.[x]

Judiciary

Danquah perceived a strong, independent and competent Judiciary as sine qua non. The adjudicatory function should be completely administered to promote human rights and development. Hence, about the appointment of Acting Judges:

“Acting Judgeship is not a desirable thing for litigants. The practice of appointing Magistrates as acting Judges is a very undesirable thing. Either a man is competent to be a Judge or he is not. If he is competent, appoint him as a judge; if not, then do not appoint him as acting Judge to let him experiment with cases of poor people who appear before him. A man is not yet competent to act as a Judge, if a man is merely a Magistrate by his profession. Let him stay a magistrate. There is no reason why responsible Barristers should not be created Judges. Barristers who are devoted to their profession, Barristers who are deem eminent in their profession, should at any time be appointed Puisne Judges”. [xi]

Holistic Development

Danquah saw this in this way. We are all involved in building our father/motherland. He said: “We are in this struggle fighting for the greatness of our nation and a great nation does not consist only of men who are greater than Aggrey; it consists of real Aggreys and real Sarbahs and real Roy Ankrahs. In other words, a great nation does not consist merely of politicians who are fighting for their own self-glorification–megalomaniac politicians. But a great nation consists of the real men who are interested first in the culture of the nation; secondly in the commercial life and industries of their nation and lastly in the real political progress and economic independence of a nation. That is why when we started this struggle we thought that we should start on all fronts–not only political independence, but commercial independence, economic independence, banking, sports, philosophy and literature”. [xii]

Lawyer and People’s Servant

Danquah practised law selflessly. Wherever his services were required, he was liberally available. He was lawyer for the Joint Provincial Council of Chiefs. He was lawyer for the cocoa farmers of the Gold coast in their struggles with the colonial authorities. He was so generous and committed to their cause, that having chalked great successes for them (chiefs), Danquah was given the accolade “Akufo) Kanea” ( a light of salvation/hope for the Farmers of Ghana). He was indeed, a man for the people.

J.B. Danquah attained a lot.

·

He was founding member of the Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences.

·

He was the first President of the Ghana Bar Association.

·

He was the First Editor of the Ghana Law Reports.

·

He was the Father of Constitutionalism in Ghana. He was the man, who through the famous case of Re Akoto, tested the constitutionality of a law passed by Parliament on the due interpretation of a constitutional provision in Ghana. Today, this is a free pathway for all Ghanaians!

NOTES AND REFERENCES

[i] Hansard, Legislative Council, September 17, 1947

[ii] Hansard, Legislative Council, February 23, 1953

[iii] Hansard, Legislative Council, October 16, 1952

[iv] Hansard, Legislative Council, December 10, 1951

[v] Hansard, Legislative Council, April 13, 1949

[vi] Hansard, Legislative Council, March 28, 1950

[vii] Hansard, Legislative Council, June 30, 1952

[viii] Hansard, Legislative Council, July 24, 1946

[ix] Hansard, Legislative Council, February12, 1953

[x] Hansard, Legislative Council, March 27, 1953

[xi] Hansard, Legislative Council, March 27,1950

[xii] Hansard, Legislative Council, March26,1952

Source: Ghana | Africa Public Policy Institute

No comments