For victims of human rights abuse in Ghana, the long wait for some form of restitution may finally be at an end. This follows indications that the government will soon begin disbursing about $1,5-million to people identified by the National Reconciliation Commission (NRC) as requiring compensation.
The NRC was set up by Parliament in 2001 to conduct hearings into abuses perpetrated between independence in 1957 and January 1993 — when lasting democratic rule was restored to the West African country.
This tumultuous period spanned five military regimes, including two headed by Jerry Rawlings. His second time in office as a military leader (1981-1992) is viewed by some as an especially bleak stretch in Ghana’s history, characterised by executions, disappearances, torture, arbitrary imprisonment and confiscation of property.
The NRC’s mandate focused on investigating and recording abuses; it was also asked to make recommendations for redress to victims, and for improvement of public institutions to prevent a recurrence of rights abuses.
Ghana’s Centre for Democratic Development (CDD), a think tank dedicated to the promotion of good governance, has been tracking the country’s reconciliation process. To find out more about the latest developments with this process, Inter Press Service sat down with two representatives of the organisation, based in the capital of Accra: Kojo Pumpuni Asante, governance and legal policy officer; and Daniel Armah-Attoh, the CDD’s research programme officer.
IPS: An August 24 report in the Daily Graphic (a state-owned newspaper) indicates that recommendations by the NRC for rights abuse victims to be compensated are finally going to be implemented this month. However, this comes about two years after the NRC wrapped up its work, and more than eight months after the deadline the government reportedly gave itself for getting a compensation fund up and running. Why the delays in bringing compensation to abuse victims?
CDD: The NRC completed its hearings in July 2004 and submitted its final report with recommendations in October 2004. The government responded in April 2005, accepting the recommendation to — among other things — establish a reparation and rehabilitation fund for victims of abuse. The government then decided to use the current 2006 national budget to settle the reparations.
So much work has gone into implementation of the NRC recommendations over the past two years. For instance, concerning the issue of reparations, the ministry of finance had to set up a resource fund for the payment of these reparations, while the interior ministry is structuring a system for how the payments should be effected so that they go to the rightful beneficiaries rather than into the wrong hands.
Yes, it has been a long period. But it is better to put the right structures in place before beginning the payments, otherwise you will have a bigger problem on your hands.
IPS: Is the amount of some $1,5-million sufficient for what needs to be done? Is the government in a position to give more money?
CDD: Emphasis ought to be made here on the fact that it was the NRC and not the government that recommended the amount of 13,5-billion cedis (about $1,5-million). This recommendation was based on the series of interviews it had with the victims of human rights abuses.
If the country had the resources to pay a higher amount of money for reparations, we’re sure it would be done. On the other hand, looking at the economic problems confronting the country, we do not think the figure is on the low side.
There is one basic issue we ought to consider as a nation. Are we paying for the suffering that people went through, or are we giving them a symbolic payment to show that the nation shares in the pain and grief that some of its citizens went through during a period in the country’s turbulent past?
If this (the latter) premise is accepted, then we believe that education and sensitisation can solve the problem of over-expectation for the amount of reparations to be paid. We have to let people know that we are not paying 100% for all the abuses and suffering that victims of human rights abuses went through — and that no amount of money, no matter how large, can really make up for the experiences that some of these people went through.
IPS: Emmanuel Gyimah-Boadi, the executive director of the CDD, was quoted as saying last year that a number of the surviving perpetrators of violations are wealthy, and should be involved in compensation for victims. As appealing as this suggestion may appear to some, is it at all feasible?
CDD: We do not recall this statement, but let’s look at it theoretically from the viewpoint of transitional justice.
Within Ghana’s reconciliation process, this was a big issue. A lot of the victims of the human rights abuses came from the 1979 and 1981-1988 periods when the Rawlings-led AFRC (Armed Forces Revolutionary Council) and PNDC (People’s National Defence Council) ruled Ghana. These two administrations evolved into the National Democratic Congress, which ruled Ghana successively from 1992 to 2000 and is currently the biggest opposition party in the country.
We are all aware of the acrimony that erupted in setting up the terms of reference and scope of the NRC. So, in that sense, any attempt to follow prosecutions or ask them (rights abusers) to pay compensation could actually divide the country instead of reconciling it.
IPS: Nonetheless, if there were some effort to get perpetrators to pay, who should head the list of those liable for compensation?
CDD: Most of the cases handled during the NRC sittings had to do with the AFRC and PNDC, which have now metamorphosed into a major political party. Any attempt to delve into names would be misconstrued as witch-hunting.
IPS: Still concerning perpetrators of the abuses, some were military personnel who were indemnified from prosecution by the 1992 Constitution. Has this aspect of the Constitution undermined the work of the NRC, do you think? After all, it could be argued that reconciliation for victims in the absence of justice for perpetrators is unattainable.
CDD: The NRC’s mandate did not cover prosecutions and that is the form Ghana’s reconciliation process took.
Yes, not everybody who has been victimised will be satisfied with the process. Perhaps in 10 years’ time, we might have to go through another reconciliation process to assess whether the NRC recommendations have been addressed adequately.
IPS: Is there, or has there been, talk of altering the Constitution to make those accused of violations liable for prosecution?
CDD: Liberia is now asking for the prosecution of perpetrators instead of simply walking the reconciliation path. Sierra Leone went the prosecution way.
The question is, does that achieve what reconciliation aims to achieve? Do we think we will achieve what we want to achieve by pursuing persecutions? In our opinion, no, and we think the government also took that into consideration — so that instead of having something in the form of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (which made amnesty for a perpetrator contingent on full disclosure of abuse), we will be better having (a process of) more limited scope.
As in Sierra Leone, the prosecution process can be very expensive and experience delays in finding and trying perpetrators. This can be painful for the victims, and if the perpetrators are eventually acquitted, what are you going to do? It will still be seen as an injustice to the victim. That person might suffer twice.
IPS: It appears that certain perpetrators did not provide a full account of their alleged misdeeds — notably in the case involving the 1982 murder of three judges and a retired army major. Is there any hope, now, that the truth of these events will ever be known?
CDD: We hope that we will get to know the real facts about the murder of the three judges and the retired army major, and who was responsible for it. Some people were arrested and punished for the murders, notably Amartey Kwei — who led the operation — and was a member of the governing council in the Rawlings PNDC, a position equivalent to that of Cabinet minister. He was executed for his crime. But for the victims, it is not all who were responsible who have been punished.
IPS: Overall, how would you rate the effect that the NRC has had on Ghanaian society?
CDD: Personally, we think the NRC has really helped the nation. Also, based on CDD survey findings, even the victims acknowledged that the NRC did a lot for them. Most of them talked of having a sense of relief after they had made their presentations to the commission. Others felt reconciled, while others also said that having been given a platform to tell their story, they did not expect to receive any form of compensation from the government.
The issue now is: What do we do after the NRC has completed its job? This is of greatest concern to us. If we do not see to the implementation of the NRC recommendations in the right way, it can rather create different problems.
Overall, it was not an exercise in futility. If we can implement even half of the NRC recommendations, Ghana will end up being a better nation than before. — IPS