CONTRIBUTE TO REVIEW PROCESS (JAN 11, 2010)

THE Constitution, under the Directive Principles of State Policy, mandates the state to take all the necessary steps to establish a sound and healthy economy whose underlying principles shall include the "recognition that the most secure democracy is the one that assures the basic necessities of life for its people as a fundamental duty".
More than 18 years after the Constitution has been in action, it has been realised that certain provisions have made it highly impossible to achieve the expectations of the people.
The near constitutional crisis caused by the run-off in 2008 must be an eye opener for the nation to take steps to avert a repetition in subsequent polls.
The transfer of power from one administration to the other should not be a chaotic one as the country witnessed in 2001 and in 2009.
In the specific case of the concerns expressed by participants in the just-ended New Year School, the change of the date for the general election can only be effected through an amendment to the Constitution.
The people have not forgotten the boycott of the parliamentary election in 1992 by other parties when Flt Lt J.J. Rawlings, the then presidential candidate of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), was declared winner of the presidential poll.
Article 112, Clause (4) of the Constitution states that "Subject to Clause (2) of Article 113 of the Constitution, a general election of members of Parliament shall be held within thirty days before the expiration of the period specified in Clause (1) of that article; and a session of Parliament shall be appointed to commence within fourteen days after the expiration of that period.
It is precisely to meet the demands of the provision that the EC, in consultation with the political parties, settled on December 7 as the day for the general election because any date earlier than that will be an infringement on that provision in the Constitution.
But there is a real challenge if we should stick to December 7 as the election day in view of how problematic the transition became on two previous occasions.
It is for this reason and other provisions that must be reviewed that the DAILY GRAPHIC disagrees with Prof. Kofi Kumado that the proposed constitutional review is "an exercise which can only be self-indulgence by the literate".
We concede that our people face massive problems and deprivations but that does not call for the postponement of the review of the Constitution, which is intended to remove the grey areas for effective governance.
There is a general consensus that the present assets declaration procedure must change if we are to be effective in the fight against corruption.
For if assets so declared by our leaders are published in the newspapers, those required to declare their assets will be judicious in the management of public funds.
Furthermore, the decoupling of the Ministry of Justice from the Attorney General's Department can only be effected by a constitutional review so that the Attorney General can have the autonomy to enforce anti-corruption laws.
Perhaps, the timing of the referendum can be a matter of concern but the review cannot be said to be a misplaced priority.
Looking back, the DAILY GRAPHIC can recount many public events on which money was wasted but certainly a constitutional review subject to public participation cannot be an organised waste of time and money.
As we kick-start the review today with the launch of the Constitutional Review Commission, the DAILY GRAPHIC calls on the people to volunteer information and memoranda that will turn the Constitution into a living document.