Retirement Benefits of Ghana’s Ex-Presidents

Based on regular appraisal of facts relating to performance, especially in the promotion of the tenets of democracy and good governance, this newspaper has been unstinting in its praise for Ghana’s immediate past President, John Kufuor.

The crowning point of his brilliant political career and service to his nation arrived with the successful conduct of the recent presidential election, won by Professor John Atta Mills, presidential candidate of the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC). Kufuor’s statesmanship in presiding over an orderly transition of power to the victorious opposition is the stuff dreams are made of, in a continent starved of heroes.

It is therefore disturbing that the President’s name is now being dragged into a controversy sparked off by a disclosure by the new Speaker of Parliament that retirement benefits for ex-presidents were approved in breach of laid down procedures. The severance package in question provides for six chauffeur-driven limousines and two furnished houses for each ex-president, who had been duly elected and had served his term(s) without blemish. Sadly, the benefits, which include a lump sum of US$400,000 were approved on Mr. Kufuor’s last day in office.

It was as though the great man caught the Africanman disease. For instance in a country like Nigeria the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) does not shy away from handing out totally indefinable emoluments out of sync with the reality of a poverty-stricken society. The Gombe State Government, among several others, which appears to be world leader in these matters, has been laying out absurd pension schemes for whoever holds office as State governor.

The general populace in Ghana are very uneasy about this development. This cannot be entirely surprising, for the reality of our own existence does not march the pension scheme which the leadership is awarding itself. Mercifully, it has been reported in the media that the retirement package has not yet been signed into law, which means that the new administration, including Ghana’s Parliament, is free to revisit it and bring the benefits in line with the material reality of economic life in the country. One-time Ghanaian President, Mr. Jerry Rawlings, has shown the path of honour open to the incumbent government by rejecting the package.

It is incumbent upon the new administration to make judicious amendments. Mr. Kufuor and his immediate predecessor, Mr. Rawlings, have done Ghana proud and should have sustainable retirement benefits. Neither exhibited the kleptocratic tendencies characteristic of the ruling elite in sub-Saharan Africa. In the twilight of the last administration, Kufuor did not carry out the usual scorched earth policy of ‘loot and go’. However, he did not have to seek self-compensation through a retirement package that is utterly ridiculous and unacceptable. It will set a very bad example throughout Africa. Leaderships cannot ask people to make ‘belt-tightening’ sacrifices and then appropriate to themselves benefits out of tune with economic realities. Ghana, which represents such a shining example of good governance for the rest of the continent, cannot and must not succumb to this path.

Scrutinised in detail, the whole benefit scheme is patently untenable. The six cars can be replaced every four years and the former President can pick any two houses. The package also includes a budget for entertainment, security and a foreign holiday each year. Not surprisingly, former President Rawlings told a parliamentary committee vetting the package to ‘get lost’ when they approached him. Characteristically, Rawlings noted: “I’ve lived with the little accorded to me all this time. I told them to get lost. You are not going to entice me with that grandiose rubbish designed for Kufuor.” This is commendable and is how a patriot should reason.

It cannot be in the public interest in Ghana and elsewhere not to reverse these benefits. Already, the NDC government is claiming that the Kufuor-led Administration did exceed its budget, leaving the country in some economic difficulty. This cannot be the time for mindless extravagance. The best that can be said, is that an error of judgment has been committed and it should be reversed. The time of African elites arrogating to themselves all manner of largesse has passed. In this as in so many instances Ghana must once again show the way.