Ghana has made significant strides in its democratic journey with admirable regulations set to enhance accountability among the political elite, but it’s imperative to question and critically evaluate some aspects of these legal frameworks that fail to live up to expectations yet are not being changed.
One such aspect that deserves scrutiny is Ghana’s Asset Declaration Law, which many consider to be both bogus and unreasonable.
The use of asset declaration as a fighting tool against corruption is known anecdotally and by evidence to be a useful approach in Europe, North America, and parts of Africa yet Ghana’s asset declaration regime does not seem to serve the purpose in any form.
Ghana’s Asset Declaration Law, stemming from Article 286 of the 1992 constitution which mandates public officials to declare their assets before assuming office and at the end of their tenure.
One of the fundamental issues with the Asset Declaration Law is the apparent lack of accountability and transparency.
Declarations are submitted privately to the Auditor-General, and the details remain hidden from the public. This opacity raises questions about the authenticity and thoroughness of the declarations. It also prevents the public from effectively scrutinizing the wealth accumulation of public officials while in public office.
Another concern is the selective enforcement of this law. In many instances, asset declarations are treated with laxity, and non-compliance often goes unpunished. This selective approach to enforcement undermines the law’s efficacy and allows room for corruption to thrive.
The Asset Declaration Law, in its current state, serves as a weak deterrent to corrupt practices. The potential sanctions for non-compliance or false declarations are insufficient to discourage public officials from engaging in corruption. Without a strong and credible deterrent, the law falls short of its intended purpose.
The Auditor-General’s Office, responsible for receiving, verifying, and managing asset declarations, is already overburdened. This overwork can lead to an inadequate examination of declarations, which ultimately weakens the law’s ability to curb corruption.
Some argue that an open asset declaration regime that is made public will be unduly invasive, requiring public officials to disclose detailed information about their financial affairs, including those of their spouses and children.
The law indeed goes as far as to request information on jewelry, paintings, and other personal items, creating an atmosphere of mistrust and discomfort but is that too much to ask of persons who seek to manage public funds and affairs?
It’s crucial to recognize that asset declaration laws are crucial in fighting corruption. However, the current law’s cumbersome is too opaque to be a tool of accountability. Its selective enforcement and ineffectual deterrence necessitates comprehensive reform.
A more effective asset declaration system should emphasize transparency, accountability, and public trust. Declarations should be made publicly accessible, with strict sanctions for non-compliance. To reduce the burden on the Auditor-General’s Office, an independent body could be established to oversee this process.
