Showing posts with label Ernest Bai Koroma. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ernest Bai Koroma. Show all posts

Tuesday, 22 December 2015

A Bummer of a Year

Twenty-fifteen has been a strange year, so it would be good to see the back of it. From the very get-go the year served notice that it was going to be a bad one. The opening salvo was in Paris when terrorists attacked the offices of the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine, killing 11 and injuring 11 others of its staff.  And this was in the background of a world already made anxious by an Ebola epidemic that some feared was poised to drag us to the brink of a holocaust. I hesitate to use the word “pandemic” because it evokes a worldwide sweep that, at no time, was ever the case. Official and unofficial news outlets, however, were not so circumspect, perhaps because muscular headlines sell newspapers, attract eyeballs and generate hits on websites, creating income, which seems to be the be-all and end-all of our modern age.
But as the year progressed, there emerged another altogether more sinister calculus involving the use of language and imagery, deployed primarily through the internet and its darker platforms, social media, wherein Dayesh, Islamic State (so-called), or ISIS grabbed attention. Whatever your preferred term for them, their intent was simple: terrify the rest of us into accepting a bankrupt ideology whose ultimate aim is world domination. They will not succeed. 
       Talking about generating income, a small company in America, Turing Pharmaceuticals, acquired exclusive rights to a six-decade old anti-parasite drug and raised its price by more than 5000%. The company's CEO, Martin Shkreli, added salt to wounds of the body politic by rejoicing that these were the kinds of actions that make American capitalism great. A few months on, I am not ashamed to admit to a measure of schadenfreude when I hear that Shkreli has been arrested for alleged activities that went beyond being just morally reprehensible to being criminal.  
America's greatness continued to be placed in doubt too by its citizens’ obsession with guns. Reports say that the number of mass gun attacks by its civilians against their fellow Americans during the year exceeds the number of days that have elapsed since the beginning of 2015. Their president deplores the insanity and, rightly, preaches against it, but those with a vested interest in the status quo mock him and remain adamant that they will never abandon their right to own guns. No, never. At the same time, law-enforcement officers in that country, perhaps taking their cue from the general public, shoot down unarmed black men who pose no threat.
The freedom to own as many guns as you like in America is scary enough, but even scarier is the emergence of a potential candidate for the 2016 presidential election whose pronouncements from the hustings  presage fire and brimstone should the man, whose pet name is “The Donald”, win the White House. Perhaps we worry too much, especially now that Mr Trump and Vladimir Putin have recently declared themselves each others’ best friend.
Do we also worry too much when we see some African countries changing or attempting to change their constitutions to allow sitting presidents to run for more than two terms? Obama warned us about the dangers in the tendency and even lampooned it when he addressed the African Union during his visit to the continent in July.  But apparently no one was amused.  Rwanda went on to change its constitution to allow Mr Kagame to remain in office till 2034, while in neighbouring Burundi, President Pierre Nkurunziza  has won a third term in a controversial vote that is being disputed with violence with the potential of degenerating into ethnic mass killings to which that country is no stranger. In Sierra Leone, too, there has been a lot of talk about allowing incumbent President Ernest Bai Koroma to have another go beyond his current second five-year term. The man himself has been strangely mute about the idea, leaving his sycophants to do all the talking.  
One other image that has captured the imagination during this year of images is that of 3-year-old Aylan Kurdi, whose body washed up on a Turkish beach during the summer as his family tried to seek refuge from the chaos that has plagued Syria for the past five years. The absurd death of this boy in such appalling circumstances touched hearts in many parts of the world, including in Canada where the Kurdi family have relatives too, and at a time also when Canadians were involved in a federal election.  It was a death that demanded responses from our political leaders and it is not an exaggeration to say that the outcome of the election was influenced, in part, by the responses of the leaders of the main political parties to the human tragedy encapsulated in that image. In the event, Justin Trudeau and his Liberal Party of Canada were returned in a massive majority, a result that repositions Canada as a caring and humane place.
In other ways, we have also worried during 2015 about securing “safe places” - in universities and other institutions of higher learning which, when compared to the plight of millions seeking safety in dire real-life circumstances, seems trivial. Mind you, I have nothing against safety wherever we go, protected from physical harm and other dangers. But it is ridiculous that people at universities should be protected from the rough and tumble of intellectual discourse or new ideas. This new sensitivity reached its nadir when, in November, free yoga lessons were suspended at the University of Ottawa because, wait for it, yoga was deemed a “cultural appropriation”.
Also, in November, one of the worst urban atrocities of the year took place, again in Paris, when Islamist gunmen in a coordinated series of attacks, opened fire at various venues in a northern suburb where people were gathered for a weekend’s relaxation. One hundred and thirty were killed. One response by the French government was to launch the heaviest attack against ISIL in Syria, ratcheting up the violence even further.
There has been a slight glimmer of hope for the world though, when in late November early December ,195 nations agreed on a framework document for reducing CO2 emissions to a level that will prevent the Earth’s temperature from rising to a level well below 2oCelsius. This is excellent, because any other concerns about what else ails our world become totally irrelevant in a world utterly destroyed by climate change. It is also hughely satisfying that the threat that Ebola presented in West Africa has now receded.
So, I think I am cheerful enough now to wish you good cheer during this Christmas (if you celebrate) and for 2016 to be less troubled than 2015. Perhaps not too much to ask?
          Tell Fren Tru



Thursday, 22 May 2014

The Putin Way-An Alternative




Something is going rotten.  A fairly big one too, framed around a strident campaign for the current president of Sierra Leone, Ernest Bai Koroma, now in his second consecutive term, to be allowed a follow-on third. Mr. President himself has been coyly silent about the matter (sort of), whilst the clamour of his friends thickens the air.

            Not surprisingly, there are others who oppose the idea, whether or not the constitution is amended to accommodate him. I am among these. Ernest Bai Koroma has done a lot to help lift Sierra Leone from where it was seven years ago, although some might see things differently. I believe, they too, are misguided. But that is neither here nor there. What is important is that the country be given a break from the Koroma brand of government, so that “his custom is not allowed to corrupt”.

Mr. Koroma himself has not said that he wants to run for another term. Indeed, at what now seems a distant past, he had declared that he was most definitely a two-term man and at the end of his second, if he was accorded one, he would leave office and revert to another life. What is worrying now, though, is that he has been quite mealy-mouthed about the antics of those who would see him run again. “It is their democratic right, in a free country, to express their views on any subject”, he declares. That right evidently extends, ultimately, to the freedom to tinker with the constitution to permit a run for a third consecutive term. But perhaps we are all getting excited about nothing, because it is by no means certain that Mr. Koroma will necessarily win a third term if he runs. Or is it?

            Anyway, the President’s friends wonder aloud why so much fuss is being made, when Tony Blair, for example and Margaret Thatcher for another, ran and ran and won the premiership of their country for more than two consecutive terms. And now, they say, Angela Merkel is getting set up for a fourth term. They declare that what is good for the European goose must be good for the African gander too. Of course they are missing the point. The constitutions under which these European politicians get to rule for more than two consecutive terms are of the parliamentary type and were not created just so that an incumbent could get their way.

Koroma's apologists should accept that it is technically impossible for him to utilize constitutional means to give himself a further presidential term.  I’m no constitutional expert but, as I understand it, the present constitution (the 1991 Constitution, to give it its technical name) does allow a change in an entrenched clause, such as the term limit for an incumbent. But such a change can only take place legally after the life of the parliament in which the change was proposed, buttressed by a two-thirds approval of the members sitting not only in that parliament but in its successor as well and, furthermore, by an equal quantum of approval in a national referendum. So there is no way that Ernest Bai Koroma can lawfully benefit this time round from a change in the constitution. The obstacles are too many. For him to run again it would require the constitution to be refashioned with a blunt instrument. And that will not do.

Ernest Bai Koroma is a fine man and president, and were it possible I, for one, would not mind being ruled for an extended period by someone like him. But changing the constitution to permit more than two terms (three, four, five, six…?) could, in due time serve up someone else whose style of government is oppressive and tyrannical. Even the most ardent of Koroma’s supporters would not want to bequeath such a constitutional monstrosity, the consequences of which we might come to regret. However, if we think this thing through carefully, we may not have to change the constitution at all.

What about the Putin way? While cynical, it could provide periodic respite from an awful leader or even from the tedium of one who is too bloody goody-goody. The Putin way proceeds thus: Vladimir goes first, for his two terms, followed by Dimitri Medvedev for his one, and then, Vlad follows for a further two... and so on. The constitution is not violated, everyone is more or less happy and Putin’s detractors are silenced. Question for us is who would be EBK’s Dmitri?  He or she can be found, I am sure, but I would suggest that when discussions are held to select him (her), caucus members should be frisked for knives before they enter the room. It could turn out quite bloody, otherwise.

I hope I have not treated the matter with too much levity but, if we do not concentrate on the issues, this thing could go really nasty and set us back decades. None of us would want that, would we?

Tell Fren Tru