Sydney Abugri Writing and Editing Services

Follow us on Facebook

War, it has been suggested, is too dangerous to be left to army generals and battalion commanders. The same goes for the fight against corruption: All citizens and institutions must join in the war.

There is a very powerful link between money and politics and this link is considered by many to hold very negative implications for democracy, especially still growing democracies like ours.

The financing of political parties and their election campaigns has been identified as an easy source of political corruption.

It is for this reason that many countries have political finance laws and regulations, most of them requiring that political parties and candidates running for political office declare the sources of their campaign money.

The relationships between the financing of political party campaigns and corruption is considered by anti-corruption fighters and watchers of the progress of democracy in developing countries to be so significant, that it would be dangerous to ignore the sources of the money parties spend on election campaigns.

The Economic and Organized Crime Office has given Dr Papa Kwesi Nduom of the Progressive People’s Party (PPP) and Hassan Ayariga of the All People’s Congress (APC), who have been disqualified from the coming presidential race up till the close of work today, to indicate the sources of funding for their political campaigns.

Ayariga is being asked to explain the source of over US$6 million he says he spent on the purchase of campaign vehicles and related expenditures. In the case of Dr Nduom, the EOCO is asking him to explain the source of the over GHc1.7 million he spent on the payment of  his own filing fees and those of PPP  parliamentary candidates.

Maybe Ghana needs to review her electoral laws: The constitutions of some countries require that after elections, all parliamentary and presidential candidates file their election returns declaring how much they spent on their campaigns and indicating the source of the money. Depending on the jurisdiction, candidates usually have several weeks after the date of an election to file the returns.

For the avoidance of doubt, the campaign period for most countries runs from the date of the announcement of the beginning of campaigning by the country’s Electoral Commission, to the eve of the Election Day.

In the case of parliamentary candidates, returns can usually be filed with returning officers in the constituency in which the candidates ran.  Under the electoral laws of many countries, any candidate or his or her agent who fails to file the mandatory returns or makes a false declaration in their return commits an offence and is liable to prosecution with for infringement ranging from hundreds of dollars in fines to imprisonment without then option of a fine.

If there is one thing problematic about the move by the Economic Crimes Office against the two disqualified presidential aspirants, it is the apparent attempt to put political corruption and general corruption in two different compartments and try to deal with them according to what might appear to some people to a be whim. The authorities have been accused by some, of victimizing the two for reasons associated with  partisan political rivalry.

In some countries serious about fighting corruption any tangible sign of illicit wealth is enough grounds for economic crime investigators to begin an investigation.

Within the context of the anti-corruption war, a public officer whose wealth is monstrously out of proportion to his verified sources of income owes the anti-corruption agencies an explanation:

Large fleet of cars sitting in the garage, a bank account swollen to bursting point, several mansions, and frequent foreign travel abroad with girlfriends, property lavished on concubines and relatives are all easily exposed in anti-corruption lifestyle checks.