Manasseh’s Folder: Is the Chief of Staff a leper?

Chief of Staff, Julius Debrah

Fellow Ghanaian, I want you to join me in asking this very important question: Is the Chief of Staff, Julius Debrah, a leper? That is the question whose answer I desperately seek. And I think it is in your interest to seek the answer too. If you don’t understand why I am asking whether the man has a hospital folder at the Weija Leprosarium, then let’s conduct this simple exercise together. Read this story below:

“President Mahama has, in accordance with Article 70(2) of the 1992 Constitution, appointed Mrs. Charlotte Kesson Smith Osei as Chairperson of the Electoral Commission (EC) of Ghana becoming the first woman to hold the position since independence in 1957.

 “A statement signed by Chief of Staff Julius Debrah said Mrs. Osei who replaces Dr. Kwadwo Afari Gyan was until her appointment the Chairperson of the National Commission for Civic Education.

 “Mrs. Osei, a lawyer with considerable experience in public service management, institutional reform also has expertise in corporate law, banking, insurance, project financing and public-private partnerships.

 “The new EC Chairperson holds a Masters in Law (LLM) from Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada and a Masters in Business Leadership from the University of South Africa, Pretoria. She obtained an LLB (Hons) from the University of Ghana in 1992.

 “Dr. Kwadwo Afari Gyan is retiring from the EC after almost two decades as Chairman of the National Electoral Commission.

 “END.”

The press statement on the EC boss’ appointment

How does this sound to you? It sounds like a newspaper article on the appointment of the EC boss, right? If this were a newspaper story, one would not need to ask further questions. But this is not a newspaper article. It is a press statement directly from the Office of the President of Ghana. It is from the Chief of Staff, Julius Debrah. The picture below is exactly how the press statement was sent to all media houses and that has been the form it comes all the time:

Now let’s ask the questions: Who issued this press statement? Why is not signed? Is the signature not necessary? Then why does the statement mention the signature of the Chief of Staff if it is not necessary? Or is this press statement different from the one the Chief of Staff signed? If so, why does the Office of the President shield the signed press statement and issue out an unsigned, reported article? If this is the statement coming from the Chief of Staff, why does he quote himself in it? If this statement is not coming from the Chief of Staff, which of the over 700 workers in the Flagstaff House is this statement coming from?

I sincerely believe there is some confusion in the head of whoever issues these press statements at the Flagstaff House (the seat of government). The fact that they will not admit their blunder makes it more disturbing.

Whenever the President makes very important appointments or has something important to say, the Chief of Staff issues a Press Statement. The problem with these statements, however, is that they come without the signature of the Chief of Staff. That’s why I am asking whether the Chief of Staff is a leper, for which reason he cannot sign press statements.

Beyond the missing signature of the Chief of Staff, press statements from the Presidency are carelessly written and one wonders if such communications are coming from the highest office of the land.

They are written like a newspaper reporter who writes a story from the original press statement. In reality, there is no original press statement. The one being referred to as the signed statement from the Chief of Staff is actually the one sent to the media without any signature.

I have tried on several occasions to draw the attention of the managers of the President’s communications to this fact, but each time I have raised the point, they come defending and attacking. The most recent one was a few weeks ago when the President appointed the EC boss.

Someone raised concern over the sloppy nature of press statements from the presidency on a WhatsApp platform I belong to and an NDC sympathiser remarked that that had been the style since President Mahama took over. I disagreed, and wrote:

“The format is wrong. I raised it with Stan Dogbe [of the Flagstaff House Communications Bureau] and he defended it. What they put out is like a reported speech. It is as if the Chief of Staff issued a statement and signed it and the one writing this statement is reporting from that statement. Statements from the ministries come with signatures so the highest office of the land should be more serious. If President Mahama has been making a mistake since he assumed office, it doesn’t make it right.”

The Deputy Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Dr. Dominic Ayine is on that Whatsapp platform and he did not take my criticism lightly. He wrote:

“You are wrong, Manasseh. The statement you’re reading is reporting that the CoS has signed a statement to the effect that someone has been appointed. Why do you prefer the signed statement? And why do you think that by not signing the statement the seat of government is not serious? I think you journalists must show some respect to high government officials.”

I know Dr. Ayine is a very intelligent and level-headed lawyer. The only reason he stooped to the level of a serial caller in his analysis and defence of this obvious communication blunder is because he is a member of the NDC government. As far as party sympathisers are concerned, the NDC can never be wrong. And officials of the Flagstaff House cannot be described as unserious.

If the least experienced lawyer in Dr. Ayine’s law firm goes to court and an opponent wants to tender such document in evidence, I am sure he or she will want to know the source of the document. The lawyer would also be interested in finding out where the original signed document being referred to is. This, I believe is what lawyers call the “best evidence rule”.

And why should journalists not prefer a signed statement to an unsigned one? Some have said that writing a newspaper style of press statements is acceptable, but they have failed to recognize the context.

In the corporate world, press statements are public relations materials and promotional in nature. They are not news items journalists would want to spend time rewriting. For this reason, they come in handy as stories so media houses easily deal with them without sweat. But the same cannot be said of statements from the Office of the President.

Which media house would not want to break the story about the appointment of the EC boss? If any form of reported speech is allowed at all, then it should be the Chief of Staff quoting the President in a statement like this. If the appointment had been made by the Chief of Staff and someone else had issued the press statement, it would not have been out of place to quote the Chief of Staff. But it is totally wrong for the Chief of Staff to quote himself in a statement coming from him. This raises the question about the source of the press statement.

Apart from the confusion created by such press statements, there are more serious reasons why I think managers of communication at the Presidency should be more serious. Not long ago, someone created a false email address of the Flagstaff House and sent out a press statement about the building of a $1.2million zoo at the Presidency. Some media houses published it and it turned out to be wrong information.

Press statements from the Presidency are often sent through the internet. With the rising popularity of social media, the traditional media no longer break news. If adequate cyber security features are not put in place, someone can take the letterhead of the Presidency and turn the nation upside down before we trace them.

The President of the Republic of Ghana and the Commander in Chief of the Ghana Armed Forces is the only person who can declare war. He is the highest officer of the land and those around him cannot continue to take communication from that office for granted.

Press statements from the ministries are often signed and their originators are known. When the Ministry of Interior, for instance, issues a press statement, the sheet often has watermark, as can be found in the picture this statement below.

Interior Ministry’s press statements have better features and sources

It is not for fun that Hon. Mark Woyongo and his communication team add security features when issuing press statements through the internet. They do that to avoid impersonation. The office of the President has been threatened once but no one seems to care.

A press statement from the Chief of Staff or the Office of President can be signed, stamped and then scanned and sent via email within 15 minutes. There are enough people to do that. The hundreds of employees at the presidency are not there to produce cassava. President Kufuor and his darling boy Alan Kyeremanteng collapsed the President’s Special Initiative on Cassava before they left office. The many staff of the Flagstaff House are therefore, there to help the President to function effectively. That is why the budget of the Presidency is bigger than most ministries, departments and agencies.

Unfortunately, all what some care about is respect for officials of the Flagstaff House. If Dr. Dominic Ayine cares to know, officials there will be respected if they treat the highest office of the land with respect. They should not treat that noble office of the land with contempt and expect respect from the citizens. The mere fact that they work in the office of the President should not earn them respect. The masquerade, our wise elders say, is not called a spirit just because of its mask. They must work and earn their respect. You don’t call your calabash worthless and blame outsiders when they use it to fetch refuse.

When Jerry John Rawlings ruled Ghana, the office of the President had some aura of dignity around it. The same was seen when John Agyekum Kufuor was president. When President John Evans Atta-Mills took over, however, that aura of dignity started to evaporate. It was not because his predecessors were better than him, but the people around him subjected the Presidency to contempt and ridicule. Officials were fired in the President’s name without his knowledge and at a point in time, it was difficult to tell who was in charge.

Apart from President Mahama’s weakness in addressing the myriad of challenges bedeviling the nation, his ambivalence towards corruption and failed promises, his appointees and people around him have not brought the needed dignity to the Presidency like the ones we saw in the first two administrations of the Fourth Republic.

President Mahama is like a carpenter whose house does not have a healthy chair. He is an astute communicator whose communication is poorly managed. When Hon. Alban Bagbin said the President was naked because of how he was managed, he was torn into pieces by acidic tongues.

But we all know what happened the day he handed over as chairman of ECOWAS. When he fumbled helplessly and groped hopelessly in broad daylight for the missing pages of his speech, that awful look on his face when he turned and there was no help behind him reminded me of the naked emperor in Hans Christian Anderson’s classic: The Emperor’s New Clothes.

That emperor surrounded himself with dishonest praise singers who feared to tell him the truth for the fear of being labeled as stupid and unfit for their jobs. They all saw the truth but did not speak up. The naïve boy who said the king was naked, told the truth, but it was already too late to save him from embarrassment.

Some of us, like that naïve boy, have been called names and stamped with innumerable tags because we damn the consequences and say it as it is! As Socrates said in his famous speech ‘The Apology’, “this plainness of speech” invites hatred. But it serves a useful purpose.

In that speech at his trial, Socrates likens himself to a gadfly stinging the lazy horse which is the Athenian state. Without him, Socrates claims, the state is liable to drift into a deep sleep, but through his influence – irritating as it may be to some – it can be wakened into productive and virtuous action.

Officials of the Flagstaff House may decide to take my advice and get serious with how they send information out of that important office before someone turns the country upside. They may also, as usual, tag me as an enemy of the regime and go to bed.

Like the charge of a prophet in Ezekiel 33:7-9 of the Holy Bible, I have done my part and the blood of the nation will not be required from my hand.

God bless our Homeland Ghana!