Would Ghana Be A Better Place If Its Leaders Were Genuinely Honourable Men And Women?

All the established democracies in the West place a high premium on personal honour and ethical behaviour amongst those at the top strata of society. Honourable conduct is therefore expected from all Establishment figures.

That is why high-ranking public officials in the West, including politicians, usually resign from their positions, when they become embroiled in scandal. An example is  former U.S. President Richard M. Nixon - who had to resign from office, on August 9, 1974, as a  result of the Watergate scandal.

Now that an increasing number of individuals and civil society organisations, regularly demand accountability from public officials in Ghana, Ghanaian democracy seems to be finally entering  its own age of accountability.

It is the reason why Mr. Martin Amidu has become a folk hero today - and civil society organisations like #Occupy Ghana have gained the trust of many Ghanaians. Ghanaians now find high-level corruption intolerable - and understand that it actually harms ordinary people in diverse ways.

Perhaps one of the ways we can halt the erosion of society's moral fabric, is to ensure that when exposed, amoral individuals involved in corruption (including sexual misconduct), do not continue to hold leadership positions in society.

The question then is: should those involved in white collar  crime,  as well as philandering males and women guilty of cuckolding their husbands, who hold important positions in the public-sector, be required to resign from their positions - once such conduct becomes public knowledge?

Those who take that stand, make the point that  if by definition those involved in various forms of corruption (including white collar crime and sexual misconduct -  cheating on partners: whether married or cohabiting),  are duplicitous, amoral and irresponsible, then Ghana should never be  left in the hands of such individuals -  since their actions clearly prove that they are unreliable.

The probability of individuals with such character traits engaging in high-level c!orruption, is quite high,  in their view.

But, are those who say that Ghana would be a far better place than it is today, if its leaders were genuinely honourable men and women, actually right in what they say? Possibly.

Obviously, sundry scoundrels,  would not have the  ability to successfully engage in create-loot-and-share scams, by taking the government to court, to obtain judgement debt orders, if honourable conduct actually mattered to many in the top strata of Ghanaian society.

Mr. Woyome, for one, would never have collected the Ghc51 millions or so that he was paid, if that was indeed the case. Food for thought.

At any rate, the question as to whether or not Ghana would be a better place if its   leaders were genuinely honourable men and women, is one that should exercise the minds of  Ghana's MPs,  whenever agreements that are inimical to the national interest, are brought to Parliament, for approval.

If they acted honourably, in all such instances - by passing laws that benefit society at large, and sanctioning only  agreements that benefit the generality of the Ghanaian populace, instead of enriching a powerful and greedy few - our homeland Ghana will definitely become a better place tomorrow, than it is today.