PROTECTING DISABLED: Ghana Falls Behind Acceptable Standards

Persons with disabilities in Ghana

By Amadu Kamil Sanah

Following a detailed consultation initiated on December 19, 2001, the UN adopted the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) on December 13, 2006.

The Convention came into force on May 3, 2008 on receiving its 20th ratification.

Ghana’s PWD Act

Before Ghana’s ratification of the UNCPRD, the country at then had already enacted the PWD Act in 2006 in fulfilment of the protection of certain fundamental human rights guaranteed to persons with disability under the 1992 Constitution.

Ghana in March 2007 signed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities as well as in August 2012 ratified it and became the 119th country in the world to ratify the Convention.

In view of that, the ratification of the UNCPRD by Ghana further demonstrates a significant step towards upholding and protecting the human rights of the some 5 more than 5 million persons with disabilities living in the country who account for the country one fifth of the population.      

Nature and Scope of the National Council on Persons with Disability

The PWD Act establishes a National Council on Persons with Disabilities (NCRPD) with the core mandate of proposing and evolving policies and strategies that would enable persons with disability enter and participate in the mainstream of the national development process.

Its primary responsibility: was to monitor and evaluate disability policies and programmes, formulate strategies for broad-based inter-sectoral, interdisciplinary involvement and participation in the implementation of the national disability policy,

It was also to advise the Ministry on Disability issues and submit to the Minister proposals for appropriate legislation on disability, mobilise resources for the attainment of its object, Coordinate activities of organisations of persons with disability, and international organisations and non- governmental organisations that deal with disability, among others.

Article 1 of the UNCRPD clearly communicates the purpose of the Convention: to promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect for their inherent dignity.

The article further clarifies and define specific group of persons to which the Convention applies, to include those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.

Background Context and Analysis of NCRPD

The global and international law context within which the UNCRPD was agreed to can be gleaned principally from (a) the principles proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in all other International Covenants on Human Rights and equal opportunities, all of which recognise the inherent dignity and worth and the equal and inalienable rights, without distinction of any kind, of all members of the human family as the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.

(B) The global recognition of the universality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelatedness of all human rights and fundamental freedoms and especially, the need for persons with disabilities to be guaranteed their full enjoyment without discrimination.

Respect for National Sovereignty and the Domestic Ratification Context 

The UNCPRD recognises the sovereignty of all nations without which there could be no international co-operation for improving the living conditions of persons with disabilities.

In recognition of this principle of sovereignty, the UNCPRD not only requires formal consent by ratification of a signatory state before it could be bound by the terms of the UNCPRD (Article 43) but also confers on each sovereign state the right to denounce the UNCPRD after ratifying it (Article 48).

What this means is that a state, by virtue of its sovereignty, cannot be coerced into signing, ratifying or otherwise acceding to the UNCPRD.

Introductory Commentary and Purpose of the Convention

Since its adoption by the UN in December 2006, the UNCRPD has undoubtedly been the subject of much commentary. The Convention is viewed as a potentially far-reaching legal instrument, which combines socio-political, economic and civil rights.

Two theoretical models of disability dominate global discourse on the protection of rights of persons with disabilities: the medical model of disability and the social model of disability. 

Whereas the medical model perceives individual impairment as an inhibitor to equality, the social model emphasises the physical and social environment as cause for exclusion.

Consequently, the UNCRPD invokes the social model of disability to advocate attitudinal change in which persons with disabilities have rights on an equal basis with others in contradistinction from the traditional paternalistic medical model of disability.

Analysis of the Contextual Framework and Provisions of the Persons with Disability Act, 2006 (Act 715)

The question here is whether the PWD Act, in its current form, adequately protects all the rights and addresses all the concerns relating to the protection of the rights of persons with disability recognised in the UNCPRD.

If not, which aspects of the Act needs to be amended or otherwise reviewed for giving effect to the protected rights of the disabled enshrined in the UNCPRD? Put differently, to what extent can Ghana, as a state party to the UNCPRD, honestly claim that its PWD Act entirely conforms to the rights of persons with disability protected in the UNCPRD? And lastly, how responsive is the PWD Act for the welfare of persons with disabilities?      

          

The Legislative Object and Purpose

The long title to the PWD Act sets out in broad terms its legislative object and purpose. The primary purpose of the Act is to provide a framework for protecting the rights of persons with disability, to establish a National Council on Persons with Disability and to provide for related matters.

“Person with Disability” means “an individual with a physical, mental or sensory impairment including a visual, hearing or speech functional disability which gives rise to physical, cultural or social barriers that substantially limits one more of the major life activities of that individual”.

This framework includes the establishment of the National Council on Persons with Disabilities, the overall objective of which is to ensure that the rights of persons with disabilities are adequately protected in accordance with law.   

International Law Context

Considering the fact that Ghana is a vibrant actor in the comity of nations, the PWD Act could not have been enacted without considering international legal principles governing the protection of the rights of the disabled.

Thus although the PWD Act was enacted at a time the UNCRPD and its accompanying Protocol was not adopted and/or assented to or otherwise ratified by any member of the international community, the enactment of the Act, in addition to the mandatory constitutional requirements, was highly influenced by existing global discourse on the urgency for protecting disability rights at the time.   

Having now ratified the UNCRPD and its accompanying Protocol, one critical issue that shall be considered in the body of this report is whether Ghana is under obligation to review its PWD Act in strict conformity with the provisions of the UNCRPD (to be discussed infra).

Evaluating the Conformity or Otherwise of the PWD Act to the UNCRPD

In terms of conformity to disability rights guaranteed under the UNCRPD, the PWD Act is analyses within the general ambit of Ghana’s international obligations imposed under the UNCRPD and for some are making some progress to consolidate in their domestic legal regimes either through national legislations or interpretation of the courts (national or regional) and other judicial tribunals.

This analysis is done with the comprehensiveness and depth of the PWD Act, its clarity and internal coherence or consistency as well as the extent to which it takes account of the general welfare of persons with disability.   

In general, the PWD Act is strikingly comprehensive in its coverage of areas of welfare enhancement of disabled persons to the neglect of some of the most important provisions enshrined in the UNCRPD.

Thus although it is refreshing to observe that the PWD Act lays particular emphasis on access to public services and other fundamental rights of the disabled specifically enshrined under Article 29 of the 1992 Constitution and several provisions of the UNCRPD, including “equality and non-discrimination” under Article 5, “Accessibility” to public places and services under Article 9, “freedom from exploitation, violence and abuse” under Article 16, freedom to live independently and included in the community under Article 19, “personal mobility” among others.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Based on the analysis it is apposite to emphasise that, the PWD Act, in its current form, requires some amendment or review to fill in the gaps and put it in total conformity to the UNCRPD.

In amending or reviewing the Act, it is recommended that the drafters of a new Act should take account of those provisions of the UNCRPD which have either not been provided for in the Act at all or where provided, are not laborious enough to give complete effect to similar provisions in the UNCRPD. For instance, the Act should be redrafted to take account of the following provisions of the UNCRPD:

The rights of “women with disabilities”, the rights of “children with disabilities”, the inherent “right to life”, right to protection and safety in “situations of risk and humanitarian emergencies”, right to “equal recognition before the law” and the “liberty and security of person”.

The others are “freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”, “protecting the integrity of the person”, right to “liberty of movement and nationality”, “freedom of expression and opinion, and access to information”, “respect for privacy” and “participation in political and public life” among others.

Taking into consideration the fact that some cultures in Ghana still perceive disability as inequality, especially with regards to traditional leadership and political activism, Article 12 on equal recognition before the law is more particularly desirous of inclusion in our law.

In conclusion, this statement is adding up to the call by the Disability Right Fund (DFR) Coalition who membership comprises of the Ghana Federation of Disability Organizations, Media Caucus on Disability and MindFreedom on government to review the PWD Act.

GNA

Editorial

SO-CALLED DISABLED

Sometime last week, the media was awash with a protest in a District against the possible appointment of a disabled person as a District Chief Executive.

The protesters who were from the New Patriotic Party (NPP) warned that they would resist any such appointment.

It is not clear what disability the prospective District Chief Executive had but most certainly it could not be an inability to think or lack of commitment to the development of his people and the District.

Indeed people who protest against physically disabled people are themselves seriously disabled by prejudice and backwardness.

Come to think of it all of us are disabled in one way or the other but all of us can contribute to the national development effort.

We urge government to remove all impediments in the way of the full participation of all citizens in the national development effort.

Local News:

Jon Benjamin under Fire 

Jon Benjamin

By Mohammed Awal

The first deputy Speaker of Parliament Joe Osei Owusu has sternly criticized the UK High Commissioner to Ghana’s modus operandi,  describing it as bereft of “decency and propriety.”

The  comment comes in the wake of Jon Benjamin’s visa fraud expose’ involving three siting lawmakers and a former one in Ghana’s parliament.

The suspects are  Richard Acheampong, NDC MP for Bia East in the Western region (NDC), Joseph Benhazin Dahah, NPP MP for Ntotroso in the Bono Ahafo region, Johnson Kwaku Adu, NPP MP for Ahafo Ano South West in the Ashanti region and George Boakye, former MP for Asunafo South in the Bono Ahafo region.

The four, according to the High Commission, have used their diplomatic passports to secure visas for persons who travelled to the UK and never returned.

In a letter dated January 20, 2017 to the Speaker of Parliament Mike Oquaye Mr Benjamin said: “The British High Commission considers the actions [of the MPs] completely unacceptable. In some cases these behaviours may arguably be criminal in nature.”

But commenting on the development Wednesday on Starr Chat,  Mr Osei Owusu who is also the chairman of the Appointments Committee of parliament said: “I think that that High Commissioner in so many instances has acted in a way that in my view transcends the bounds of decency and propriety.”

According to him, the High commissioner’s letter to parliament was unnecessary as “these are personal travel arrangements. I believe strongly that if any of them took the matter up to appeal, some of those things may be overturned.”

Kufuor appointed Senior Grand Warden of UK Freemason Lodge

                                                                                        

By Delali Adogla-Bessa

Former President John Agyekum Kufuor has been appointed a Senior Grand Warden of the United Grand Lodge of England (UGLE).

He was on Wednesday appointed by the United Grand Lodge of England Grand Master, Prince Edward, the Duke of Kent, who is the longest serving Grand Master.

“Congratulations to Right Worshipful Brother, His Excellency John Kofi Agyekum Kufuor, PGSwdB, former President of the Republic of Ghana, who has been appointed Senior Grand Warden by the Grand Master, His Royal Highness, The Duke of Kent,” the lodge announced on its Facebook page.

The United Grand Lodge of England is the governing body for most freemasons within the UK, with lodges in other Commonwealth countries outside the United Kingdom.

The United Grand Lodge of England claims to be the oldest Grand Lodge in the world, by descent from the first Grand Lodge formed in London in 1717.

It is Headquartered in Freemasons’ Hall, London and is known to have more than 200,000 members.

President Kufuor is no stranger to such distinguished honors having previously been honored as a Knight Commander of the Order of Bath of the UK by Queen Elizabeth II and the highest award of the Order of the House of Orange by Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, among other international honors.

Source: citifmonline

Ghana and Russia building stronger economic ties
For nearly six decades, Ghana and Russia have had an excellent diplomatic relations and still looking to build a stronger economic cooperation. In this exclusive GNA interview, Ms. Shirley Ayorkor Botwe, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration, explains to Kester Kenn Klomegah, the Moscow Bureau Chief, a number of significant corporate projects being undertaken by Russians as well as some aspects of the current economic cooperation between the two countries.

Shirley Ayorkor Botwe, Minister of Foreign Affairs

Q: Hon. Minister, how would you assess the current diplomatic relations between the Republic of Ghana and the Russian Federation?

A: Currently, Ghana and Russia have an excellent diplomatic relations, which has been developed over the years, precisely 59 years. Although, for a relationship lasting this long, one would have expected it to move past where it is now. In short, there is still room for improvement.

Q: Specifically, what is the level of economic cooperation between the two countries? And what are your priorities in the economic and business sphere?

A: Ghana and Russia are presently building stronger economic ties. Through the framework of the Ghana-Russia Permanent Joint Commission for Cooperation (PJCC), the two countries have pushed forward the agenda of fostering economic cooperation, first and foremost, in their relationship. Two sessions of the Ghana-Russia PJCC have been held already following the reactivation of the PJCC in 2013, with the last one taking place in Accra in September 2016.

The PJCC brings government officials and business leaders of the two countries together to discuss and forge cooperation on a wide range of issues of mutual interest to both nations such as Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy, Immigration, Narcotics Control, Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments, Agriculture, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, Trade and Industry, Geology and Mineral Resources, Education and Science, Health, Transport, Housing, Information Communication Technology, and the Military.

Q: Russia is an Energy giant. Ghana has persistent energy problems. Do you think Russia can play a significant role in providing long-term solution and most probably support the proposed nation-wide industrialisation programme of the current government?

A: Certainly, Russia can play, and is being engaged to play, a significant role in the long-term generation of power in Ghana. Negotiations are progressing steadily between the Ministry of Energy of the Republic of Ghana and ROSATOM of the Russian Federation in the construction and operation of the first ever Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) in Ghana and West Africa, with Russian design power units 1000-1200 MW capacity, together with other affiliated nuclear projects. It is hoped that both sides would expedite the negotiations, come to early consensus and have the project take off in good time.

Ghana is open to all the support that it could get from its friends and development partners in the nation-building drive, particularly in the nation-wide industrialisation programme of “one-district-one-factory” of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) administration.  Ghana could benefit a lot from the rich experiences of Russia, which has advanced knowledge, in the area of industrialisation. In any case, getting the power generating project going will impact considerably on the programme since the role of electricity cannot be downplayed in any industrial development.

Russian President Vladimir Putin

Q: Hon. Minister, what opportunities and incentives are currently available for foreign investors especially in the medium scale (size) businesses in Ghana? What is your special message for potential Russian investors here?

A: Ghana has one of the most attractive investment packages for foreign investors in Africa. Opportunities abound in nearly all the sectors of the Ghanaian economy, for instance in transportation, construction, real estate, banking, health, education, manufacturing, energy, agriculture and commerce, for every kind of foreign investor and on any scale, being large, medium or small.

The investment incentives include tax holidays right from the start of operation up to five, seven and 10 years depending on the type of investment. Five years for real estate investment, seven years for waste processing investment and 10 years for free-zone enterprise or development are few of the examples. Besides these attractions, there are investment guarantees, beginning with the constitutional guarantee, investment laws that guarantee 100% transfer of profits, dividends, etc., as well as negotiations of Bilateral Investment Promotion Treaties (BITs) and Double Taxation Agreements (DTAs).

The message to Russian investors is that Ghana is the gateway to West Africa and, therefore, the right place to invest in West Africa and Africa as a whole. With solid political stability and security, together with the very attractive investment package and easy accessibility to the entire West Africa market, not to mention the legendary Ghanaian hospitality, investing in Ghana is worthwhile and extremely profitable to all foreign investors. Thus, Russian investors should seize the opportunity to invest in Ghana for it is the right time and the right place to be in Africa.

Q: Ghana celebrated its 60th independence in March. In your opinion, what are the landmark achievements in the economy? How important are these achievements for attracting foreign business into the country?

A: Sixty years ago on 6th March, 1957, Ghana attained its independence from Great Britain. The country has had its share of ups and downs as expected of any growing nation or individual for that matter. The country has come a long way. A number of landmark achievements in the economy could be identified in most sectors – human resource development, telecommunication, services and infrastructure, among many others.

However, the prevailing stable political climate and security could not be overlooked.  It is viewed to be the striking achievement of the nation at this point in time, out of which outstanding achievements could be attained in all the sectors of the country, be it the economy, health or education.

Q: Finally, Ghana and Russia will also mark their 60th year of establishment of diplomatic relations in 2018. How would you like to see the diplomatic relations developed in the next few years?

A: As stated earlier, as much as there exists a very good relations between Ghana and Russia, greater efforts need to be employed in fostering stronger economic ties.  It is hoped that as Ghana and Russia commemorate 60 years of formal diplomatic relations, the level of economic cooperation between them would catch up with the well-developed bilateral political relations in the coming years. Emphasis should also be placed on developing “people-to-people” relations, whereby the peoples of both countries would have better understanding of each other. Cultural cooperation, tourism, dissemination of information of each other’s customs and practices should be emphasised in bringing the people together for their mutual benefit. 

GNA

The Looting Machine Called Capitalism 

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

I have come to the conclusion that capitalism is successful primarily because it can impose the majority of the costs associated with its economic activities on outside parties and on the environment. In other words, capitalists make profits because their costs are externalized and born by others. In the US, society and the environment have to pick up the tab produced by capitalist activity.

In the past when critics raised the question about external costs, that is, costs that are external to the company although produced by the company’s activities, economists answered that it was not really a problem, because those harmed by the activity could be compensated for the damages that they suffered. This statement was intended to reinforce the claim that capitalism served the general welfare. However, the extremely primitive nature of American property rights meant that rarely would those suffering harm be compensated. The apologists for capitalism saved the system in the abstract, but not in reality.

My recent article, “The Destruction of Inlet Beach,” made it clear to me that very little, if any, of the real estate development underway would be profitable if the external costs imposed on existing property holders had to be compensated.

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/04/17/destruction-inlet-beach/

Consider just a few examples. When a taller house is constructed in front of one of less height, the Gulf view of the latter is preempted. The damage to the property value of the house whose view has been blocked is immense. Would the developer build such a tall structure if the disadvantaged existing property had to be compensated for the decline in its value?

When a house is built that can sleep 20 or 30 people next to a family’s vacation home or residence, the noise and congestion destroys the family’s ability to enjoy their own property. If they had to be compensated for their loss, would the hotel, disquised as a “single family dwelling” have been built?

Walton County, Florida, is so unconcerned about these vital issues that it has permitted construction of structures that can accommodate 30 people, but provide only three parking spaces. Where do the rental guests park? How many residents will find themselves blocked in their own driveways or with cars parked on their lawns?

As real estate developers build up congestion, travel times are extended. What formerly was a 5 minute drive from Inlet Beach to Seaside along 30-A can now take 45 minutes during summer and holidays, possibly longer. Residents and visitors pay the price of the developers’ profits in lost time. The road is a two-lane road that cannot be widened. Yet Walton County’s planning department took no account of the gridlock that would emerge.

As the state and federal highways serving the area were two lanes, over-development made hurricane evacuation impossible. Florida and US taxpayers had to pay for turning two lane highways into four lane highways in order to provide some semblance of hurricane evacuation. After a decade, the widening of highway 79, which runs North-South is still not completed to its connection to Interstate 10. Luckily, there have been no hurricanes.

If developers had to pay these costs instead of passing them on to taxpayers, would their projects still be profitable?

Now consider the external costs of offshoring the production of goods and services that US corporations, such as Apple and Nike, market to Americans. When production facilities in the US are closed and the jobs are moved to China, for example, the American workers lose their jobs, medical coverage, careers, pension provision, and often their self-respect when they are unable to find comparable employment or any employment. Some fall behind in their mortgage and car payments and lose their homes and cars. The cities, states, and federal governments lose the tax base as personal income and sales taxes decline and as depressed housing and commercial real estate prices in the abandoned communities depress property taxes. Social security and Medicare funding is harmed as payroll tax deposits fall. State and local infrastructure declines. Possibly crime rises. Safety net needs rise, but expenditures are cut as tax revenues decline. Municipal and state workers find their pensions at risk. Education suffers. All of these costs greatly exceed Apple’s and Nike’s profits from substituting cheaper foreign labor for American labor. Contradicting the neoliberal claims, Apple’s and Nike’s prices do not drop despite the collapse in labor costs that the corporations experience.

A country that was intelligently governed would not permit this. As the US is so poorly governed, the executives and shareholders of global corporations are greatly enriched because they can impose the costs associated with their profits on external third parties.

The unambigious fact is that US capitalism is a mechanism for looting the many for the benefit of the few. Neoliberal economics was constructed in order to support this looting. In other words, neoliberal economists are whores just like the Western print and TV media.

Yet, Americans are so insouciant that you will hear those who are being looted praise the merits of “free market capitalism.”

So far we have barely scratched the surface of the external costs that capitalism imposes. Now consider the pollution of the air, soil, waterways, and oceans that result from profit-making activities. Consider the radioactive wastes pouring out of Fukushima since March 2011 into the Pacific Ocean. Consider the dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico from agricultural chemical fertilizer run-off. Consider the destruction of the Apalachicola, Florida, oyster beds from the restricted river water that feeds the bay due to overdevelopment upstream. Examples such as these are endless. The corporations responsible for this destruction bear none of the costs.

If it turns out that global warming and ocean acidification are consequences of capitalism’s carbon-based energy system, the entire world could end up dead from the external costs of capitalism.

Free market advocates love to ridicule economic planning, and Alan Greenspan and Larry Summers actually said that “markets are self-regulating.” There is no sign anywhere of this self-regulation. Instead, there are external costs piled upon external costs. The absence of planning is why over-development has made 30-A dysfunctional, and it is why over-development has made metropolitan areas, such as Atlanta, Georgia, dysfunctional. Planning does not mean the replacement of markets. It means the provision of rules that produce rational results instead of shifting costs of development onto third parties.

If capitalism had to cover the cost of its activities, how many of the activities would pay?

As capitalists do not have to cover their external costs, what limits the costs?

Once the external costs exceed the biosphere’s ability to process the waste products associated with external costs, life ends.

We cannot survive an unregulated capitalism with a system of primitive property rights. Ecological economists such as Herman Daly understand this, but neoliberal economists are apologists for capitalist looting. In days gone by when mankind’s footprint on the planet was light, what Daly calls an “empty world,” productive activities did not produce more wastes than the planet could cleanse. But the heavy foot of our time, what Daly calls a “full world,” requires extensive regulation. The Trump administration’s program of rolling back environmental protection, for example, will multiply external costs. To claim that this will increase economic growth is idiotic. As Daly (and Michael Hudson) emphasize, the measure known as Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is so flawed that we do not know whether the increased output costs more to produce than it is worth. GDP is really a measure of what has been looted without reference to the cost of the looting. Environmental deregulation means that capitalists can treat the environment as a garbage dump. The planet can become so toxic that it cannot recover.

In the United States and generally across the Western world, property rights exist only in a narrow, truncated form. A developer can steal your view forever and your solitude for the period his construction requires. If the Japanese can have property rights in views, in quiet which requires noise abatement, and in sun fall on their property, why can’t Americans? After all, we are alleged to be the “exceptional people.”

But in actual fact, Americans are the least exceptional people in human history. Americans have no rights at all. We hapless insignificant beings have to accept whatever capitalists and their puppet government impose on us. And we are so stupid we call it “Freedom and Democracy America.”

The original source of this article is Paul Craig Roberts