Decentralization is threat to perks of public office

By Ebenezer Hanson

An ex-Minister of Local Government and Rural Development, Mr. Kwamena Ahwoi, has observed that decentralization poses a threat to those in government because it whittles away the power they wield. Thus the powers that-be will invariably employ both covert and overt measures to resist any move to decentralize power.

Consequently, he has urged stakeholders like civil society organizations (CSOs) not to relent in their efforts at ensuring that the ends of decentralization are achieved, though the efforts will not be achieved on a silver platter.

“Decentralization poses a threat to the perks of those in government. Don’t forget that if governance is fully decentralized the officer in Accra who might have been receiving a few things from those who come from the districts stands to lose in the process.”

The observation was made at a two-day workshop on decentralization by Public Agenda at Dodowa under the theme “Reviewing the Legislative and Policy Framework for Effective Decentralization in Ghana”. The objective of the workshop was to take inventory of the decentralization process and to assess the effectiveness of the involvement of civil society organizations and other stakeholders in fashioning the way forward.

Reacting to a comment which suggested that sections of the media have not given much prominence to local government issues for of lack of monetary motivation, Mr Ahwoi retorted, “ it is not only the media, the entire system of governance has been monetized.”

The term ‘decentralization’ has been subjected to elastic interpretation and some say that, in part, accounts for the seemingly nebulous path of the process. The issue has been compounded by the fact that the 1992 Constitution has provisions on decentralization it is silent on its definition.
The amorphous meaning of decentralization has been captured aptly in Public Agenda’s flagship publication, “The Status of Ghana’s Fiscal Decentralization”. It notes, “The concept of decentralization does not lend itself to single and generally acceptable definition. As result, it tends to be elusive and its application as a development strategy has always varied from one state to another.”

In the words of George Kyei-Baffour, a former President of NALAG, “Decentralization has been managed by governments at their own convenience. Government wants to talk but when they get into power they don’t want to walk talk.” He recalled that the New Patriotic Party (NPP) administration promised to make the position of DCEs elective but when they assumed the reigns of power they reneged.

He lamented that sometimes there have been “no support from CSOs” to empower practitioners to push drive the decentralization agenda forward.

Mr. Ahwoi has always maintained that the NPP brushed aside their promise upon the realization that the District Security Co-ordinating Committee (DISEC) is chaired by the DCE. Thus if a member of the opposition wins the position of the DCE in the event of an election then he will chair the DISEC and that will be politically and security unwise.

The concentration or devolution or otherwise of power and its implications have long been recognized by philosophers years ago. A classic case was the observation by the French philosopher Baron Montesquieu that, when power is concentrated in the hands of a person or a few it leads to tyranny. The idea evolved into the time-tested political concept of the “Theory of Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances”, the bedrock of the United States of American democracy, which has lasted and flourish over 200 years , which many countries have adopted as their system of government worldwide.