"TACTFUL ENGAGEMENT", A WORTHWHILE APPROACH TO REFORMS (LEGAL EDUCATION)

 “One of the tests of leadership is the ability to recognize a problem before it becomes an emergency”.  (Arnold Glasow). Tact therefore is the art of making a point without making an enemy. – Isaac Newton

I have come under fire for the simple reason that I oppose the use of ‘demonstration’ as a tool by the SRC of the Ghana School of law to advocate for reforms. I had alleged that the SRC were not in search of a solution to the problems of students, rather, they were on a self-serving mission.

Undoubtedly, legal education in Ghana need drastic reforms. My disagreement however is the strategy adopted this year. My reason is that, public protest (demonstrations) as used over the years had not yielded any results hence the need to adopt a different strategy.

PROGRESS MADE - (2018/19)
After the release of the 2018/19 bar exams results, students expressed disaffection by marching to Parliament and presented a petition. Although the whole number of students were prevented from entering into Parliament, the SRC succeeded in presenting the petition to the leadership of Parliament. The Parliamentary Select Committee on Constitution, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs met with all the stakeholders (SRC, Lecturers, GLC).

The Committee’s report to the Plenary inter alia recommended to the General Legal Council (GLC):

i.    that the Independent Exams Committee (IEC) should endeavor to set the examination questions within the scope of the course manual(s) it provides to students.

ii.  that the IEC should ensure early marking and release of results, at least one month prior to the commencement of the mandatory internship.

iii.  that the GLC should reduce the remarking fee from GH¢3,000.00 to GH¢500.00.

iv.  that the implementation of the repeat policy under Regulation 14 of LI 2365 has         
produced some undesirable outcomes and needs to be reviewed.

v.  that the IEC should immediately release all marking schemes and examiner’s reports to professional law students and lecturers of the GSL.

vi.  that the GLC should initiate processes for the review of the Legal Profession (Professional and Post-Call Law Course) Regulations, 2018 (LI 2355).

MEETING WITH PRESIDENT NANA AKUFFO ADDO

At a meeting with H.E. Nana Akuffo Addo, the SRC was assured that the petition would receive attention at the highest level.

STEPS TOWARDS REFORMS

Few months after the meeting with the President, Parliament in a newpaper publication announced its intention to review the Legal Profession Act and invited interested parties to submit memos. It is not clear if the SRC responded to the call of Parliament. Apparently, the processes have ended and the Attorney General is ready to lay the Bill before Parliament.

SUGGESTIONS MADE TO THE SRC

After the Bar Examinations in June 2019, it was inter alia suggested to the SRC (in person, phone calls and even whatsapp):

i.  that steps should be taken to get the GLC to implement the recommendations of the 
Select Committee of Parliament, particularly, the need for a reduction of the remarking
fee from GHS3,000 to GHS500 since that could be implemented solely by the GLC.

It was strongly suggested that the advocacy should as much as possible be made formally (by letter) since that would be the only proof of their commitment to the interest of students. 

Some days later, I heard the SRC President on TV 3 midday news calling on the GLC to implement the recommendations of the Parliamentary Select Committee.

ii.  As contingency, it was suggested that the executive committee and General Assembly of the SRC should consider setting up a welfare fund to “partly support” students who would not be able to pay the GHS3,000 remarking fees, should the “unexpected happen”. As seed money, it was proposed that about GHS100 of each student’s SRC dues may be deducted and channeled to the pool of funds; whiles efforts are put in place to raise additional funds. So that when the “unfortunate happens”, the SRC may (based on available funds) contribute say GHS1,000 of the GHS3,000 in support. 

iii.  It was also suggested that the use of “demos”, have over the years, not yielded any results. Resorting to that approach only worsens our chances of attaining results. An alternative approach was needed. ETC.

MY PHILOSOPHY
The author holds the view that “demonstrations” and other extreme means of protest should only be adopted where “the doors to dialogue is closed”. Last year (2018/19), “demonstration” was appropriate because the GLC had by a letter to SRC closed “the door to dialogue”. It was not the case this year.

NOTICE OF PUBLIC PROTEST (“DEMO”)
Notice was issued calling on students and concerned persons to join in the public protest on October 7, 2019.

On TV 3’s “Newday” program on October 8, 2019, the SRC President of the School of Law, speaking on the Police brutalities indicated that they indeed served notice (10 days) on the Police however the Police objected to the date (Oct. 7) and requested of the leadership to postpone the march. Their reason was that they (Police) did not have enough personnel to escort the demonstrators. According to the President, his team ignored the request of the Police and their reasons were that plans were far advanced for the protest to commence, moreover, the law only provided for the police to be served notice of intent to embark on the demonstration and if the police did not agree, they could only restrain them by a court injunction. The Police thus threatened that “if anything went wrong” during the protest march, the leadership would be arrested (the feed is on TV 3’s Facebook page).

Leadership knew the consequences when the demonstrators sat in the middle of the road.

POLICE BRUTALITIES
Indeed, the force used by the Police to disperse the protesting students was unreasonable and must be condemned.

The police has however justified its use of force for reasons inter alia, the protesters obstructed traffic by sitting in the middle of the road, pelting stones and offensive weapons at the police, etc. There is no proof that stones were pelted, however there exist a video feed of law students obstructing the free flow of traffic by ‘sitting in the middle of the road’. Subsequently, the Police lived out their threat by arresting the leadership and dispersing the crowd.

PRESENTATION OF PETITION TO HIS EXCELLENCY JOHN D. MAHAMA
The “demo” turned bizarre when the demonstrators turned to the residence of the former President to present a petition.  Was the conduct premeditated? Philemon Laar (one of the organizers) on Citi TV’s “Point of View” program on October 7, 2019 justified the involvement of the former president in the expression "…when the president Akuffo Addo unleashed the police on us, we had no option but to go to the office of the former president and he listened to us. I think that leadership requires that you should just listen to your people but you wouldn’t just listen… We went to the flagstaff house they didn’t listen to us but the former president listened to us". 

At this point, the true intent of leadership was betrayed. The engagement was politically motivated after all; that statement was unfortunate.

POST- OCTOBER 7 ("DEMO")

The occasion has generated a lot of discussions centered on reforming legal education in Ghana. The question which however begs an answer is “WHAT UNIQUE RESULTS HAS THE “DEMO” ACHIEVED”.

It is observed that the very issues that were discussed last year is regurgitated. To this the question is, COULD RESULTS BE ACHIEVED IF A DIFFERENT APPROACH WAS ADOPTED?

Sadly, the problem(s) persist. The remarking fee remains GHS3,000, the repeat policy exist, examiners report and marking scheme did not come along with our exams results, the desired reforms (opening up legal education) are pending, etc

CONCLUSION

What was the motivation for leading a “demonstration” mindful that little or no results would be achieved? We had a better chance of effecting change if leadership had followed-up on the recommendations of Parliament's Select Committee as well as what the President did when he was petitioned.

The success of leadership is not dependent on who is able to organize the best of "demos", rather he who attains results.

Leadership has a greater role to play in the quest for reforms. ‘EFFECTIVE FOLLOW-UP on progress made is the way forward.

Second, leadership must take steps to ensure that the said Bill on Legal Education is as soon as possible submitted to Parliament and tailored to suit the desired needed reforms.

Third, the actions of leadership must be geared towards “the general good”. Bluntly, leadership must decouple their personal interests from set goals.

Most importantly, the focus of leadership must be towards ACHIEVING RESULTS.

We are hopeful that reforms would be achieved someday soon.