Former Convention People’s Party (CPP) running mate, Wayoe Ghanamannti Esq., has sharply criticised the government’s decision to revoke the Legislative Instrument (L.I.) on illegal mining, arguing it fails to address the extensive damage caused by ‘galamsey’ and jeopardises the nation’s future.

Speaking on Joy Prime’s Prime Insight, Mr. Ghanamannti expressed concern that the fight against illegal mining is at a crucial juncture but lamented what he perceives as a waning commitment from Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), who he says initially demonstrated strong opposition.

“The fight against galamsey is becoming critical. From what I’ve seen, the CSOs made a lot of noise after they went to the Jubilee House for a meeting. All of them have gone quiet,” he observed.

He further described a growing trend of hypocrisy within the country’s democratic system, stating that strong rhetoric is often not accompanied by decisive action. “We think we are democratic, but the hypocrisy is too much,” he stated.

Mr. Ghanamannti believes that if illegal mining is genuinely considered an existential threat, more stringent measures are essential. He warned of the severe consequences of galamsey on public health and the environment. “If you say that galamsey is existential, it is a danger to the citizens of this country. People are being deformed, newborns are being affected, and our waters are getting damaged. Somebody must be held responsible,” he emphasised.

According to him, simply revoking the L.I. does not tackle the fundamental issue of environmental degradation. “The L.I. does not purify the waters,” he said. “The L.I. is not going to remove the contaminated nature of the soil.”

He cautioned that land polluted by galamsey could remain unusable for decades. “We are being told that when the soil gets contaminated, it’s going to take about 50, 60, 70 years to recover. By that time, you and I will be gone,” he warned.

Ghanamannti argued that treating galamsey as a political issue rather than a national emergency is a disservice to Ghana’s future. He proposed that the President should declare a state of emergency in affected areas as the most effective response. “John Mahama is the one to call for a state of emergency and halt the activity. When you call a state of emergency, you put the country on red alert. It means you can properly deploy the military,” he explained.

He also criticised CSOs for backing away from their initial calls for a state of emergency. “Everybody was saying, Let’s call a state of emergency, and all of a sudden, they are chickening out. As for me, my constitutional duty under Article 41 as a citizen means I won’t chicken out,” he asserted.

Drawing a parallel with Singapore, Mr. Ghanamannti suggested that strong leadership and rigorous enforcement are sometimes necessary to effect behavioural change. “Human beings as we are, sometimes we want force. That is why when leaders take hard measures, we later applaud them,” he stated.

He cited Singapore’s success in eliminating public spitting through strict laws as an example of how decisive action can enforce discipline. “Singaporeans used to spit everywhere. They don’t do that today because strong measures were taken. It was filthy, and leadership dealt with it,” he recounted.

Mr. Ghanamannti maintained that a state of emergency is the only way to establish clear boundaries and deter illegal miners. “When Ghanaians know there is a state of emergency in specific areas, trust me, they won’t go there,” he said. “But with these laws we revoke, people will still go there. DCEs and MCEs are still involved.”

He clarified that his concerns are rooted in constitutional responsibility, not personal attacks. “It’s not about the person sitting there. It’s about the laws,” he said.

Referencing Article 69 of the Constitution, which outlines grounds for the removal of a president whose conduct is detrimental to the state, Mr. Ghanamannti questioned its infrequent application. “The Constitution says there shall be a president who is head of state and commander-in-chief. It doesn’t mention names. Anybody who occupies that position must act. If we say we are constitutionalists and we have Article 69, why are we not giving a premium to it?” he asked.

He also levelled criticism at the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, accusing him of inaction regarding a notice he had submitted. “With all due respect, Alban Bagbin is one of the democratic hypocrites. He uses the same Constitution in Parliament, quotes Scripture, but when it comes to proper action, he is not doing it,” he stated.

Mr. Ghanamannti clarified that his submission to the Speaker was a notice, not a petition, and asserted that the Speaker has no authority to withhold it. “The Constitution is clear. When I bring a notice under Article 69, send it to the Chief Justice. The Speaker cannot hold on to it,” he explained.

He added that the Chief Justice would then convene a panel to assess whether a prima facie case exists. “If the Chief Justice says there is no prima facie case, I’ll be excited,” he said. “Then Ghana and posterity will know that no wrong was done.”

Concluding his remarks, Mr. Ghanamannti reiterated that repealing the L.I. alone is insufficient to protect the environment. “Repealing the L.I have not solved the problem because the point is that if LEAD gets into the soil, it’s going to take about 70, 80, 100 years to be revived. That is scary,” he said.

Image Source: MYJOYONLINE