- I championed the opposition against the Draft Public Universities Bill last year. So, when I received a notification that the Bill is now before Parliament, I secured a copy and read it thoroughly.
- Although some earlier concerns have been addressed in the Draft Bill, I wasn’t, and I am still not happy with some of the provisions. As Citizen and not Spectator, I therefore sought audience with the sector Minister, and he graciously agreed to meet with me, in spite of his tight schedule. The meeting ended with some explanations and clarifications.
- More importantly, I realized there is a palpable will to dialogue further, to re-shape and amend thorny areas of concern, particularly the ones germane to Academic Freedom, that makes the bill seem totalitarian. The Minister, per my observations of his body language, wasn’t that much intransigent. He seemed willing to make some compromises. He appeared open for more discussions on some of the thorny issues, for the purposes of building the needed consensus on the Draft Bill. This, I find quite sobering and commendable on his part.
- I respectfully urge all to take advantage of the Parliamentary Committee on Education’s call for the submission of Memorandum, to voice their concerns.
- But before submitting the memorandum, let us do well to thoroughly read our respective Acts that governs our universities vis-a-vis the new Draft Bill. For, some of the thorny issues in the draft bill, were nearly lifted from our existing Acts.
- Also, let us read the Ghana Tertiary Education Policy, from which many of the provisions in the draft bill originated. The Tertiary Education Policy and the Draft Bill must be read together, to appreciate the rationale for some of the provisions in the Bill. It is important to note that the Policy was drafted with with extensive input from some University Lecturers (not necessarily representing University Teachers) and in consultations with representatives of other key stakeholder constituents.
- We generally have a problem with quality representation in Ghana. A British Political Scientist, Andrew Heywood (2002) identified four main models of representation, namely, trustee, delegate, mandate, and resemblance models of representation. For the sake of time, I will briefly talk about the first two. A representative operates trusteeship when he or she serves as an expert, whose judgment on issues can be trusted in deciding on behalf of constituents. Trustees, are usually not expected to consult their constituents in deciding on their (constituents) behalf. On the other hand, a representative operates the delegate model, when he refuses to wield a mind of his own in decision making. He must always consult and act only in reflection of the views of constituents.
- For quick and effective decision making under any democracy, the trustee model of representation mag often be preferred. Representatives are therefore required to have some expertise knowledge on matters affecting constituents. They are required to act without consulting. However, Hanna Pitkin, another authority and student of Representation, argues that, when a matter is of fundamental importance to constituents, they must be consulted, as no trustee can pretend to understand what directly affect constituents better than the constituents themselves.
- Unfortunately, it appears in Ghana, some Representatives either elected or appointed, often participate in taking far reaching decisions, that bothers on matters that are of extreme importance to constituents, without, either soliciting constituent inputs or reporting decisions taken to constituents. Sometimes they forget to report. At times too, they don’t report because the constituents themselves do not care.
- But on matters of extreme importance to constituents, smart representatives must shun trusteeship and operate like delegates, directly mirroring the views of constituents. This is the only way to reduce the shock and combative reaction from constituents that greet bills and policy decisions formulated.
- Also, in asking people to go and represent us, we must be sure those we select have what it takes to serve us well, and can elicit constituent acceptance of decisions taken. There are several instances, where constituents have rubbished decisions taken by representatives selected by them. For instance, even though a whole General Secretary was selected to represent a party on the Electoral Reforms Committee in Ghana, other top party echelons publicly rubbished some of the proposals agreed upon. Also, in formulating the now abandoned 40 year National Development Plan, there were cross-party representation on the processes. Yet, the document is gathering dust on the shelves.
- In probing the rationale and reasoning behind some of the very contentious provisions of the Draft Public Universities Bill, there is always the refrain “your representatives and people were consulted”. The questions that then, arise, are: who were those consulted? Are they still in office? Why are they not explaining the issues? Are they done serving their terms of office? Did they brief their constituents about the decisions taken? Are there efforts by current representatives to contact their predecessors to gain insight about why things are the way they are now? We must begin to do an introspection in finding answers to some questions, so we can fully arm ourselves in defending our opposition to some of the contents of the Draft Bill.
- I raised some of the contentious provisions of the Draft Bill with the Minister, as a concerned individual. His response, wasn’t defensive and dismissive at all. He said “…If that is what is going to create problem, we can change it, let them submit their memos. I am not saying this because you are sitting here, I am willing to meet and dialogue further to iron out the concerns…”
- So, over to you, respected stakeholders. I will be sending my own memo to the Parliamentary Committee, and urge everyone else to do same, with alacrity, to ensure popular acceptance of the final product that comes out of the legislative processes.
- I am very hopeful that the submission of memoranda by stakeholders, will favorably tinker the Draft Bill in a manner that makes it achieve its goal, while maintaining the sanctity of Academic Freedom. In the unlikely event that this doesn’t happen, and the Bill is passed in its current form, I know there certainly will erupt a PLAN B response from stakeholders, and I will actively be part.
Yaw Gyampo
A31 Prabiw
- A. V. Ansah Street
Saltpond
&
Suro Nipa House
Kubease
Larteh-Akuapim
