The demolitions which took place on the beach of La in Accra have prompted questions over whether or not certain decisions by the incumbent government are given exhaustive thoughts before acting upon them.
Our commentary is based on the assumption that government, and for that matter the President, knew about the pending demolitions and the actions on the D-Day which denied thousands of families their sources of livelihood.
Information has it that the affected victims of the demolitions will be compensated for their losses. We can bet such compensations would not be near enough to assuage the pain of the victims let alone provide them alternative sources of income.
Couldn’t the demolitions have been stopped considering the livelihood loss effects from the foolish actions?
Demolitions and assaults on persons at the site followed by within a fortnight or even less an announcement about a planned compensation sounds spurious.
Questions are rightly being posed about the source of the compensations and, indeed, how these would be determined.
Also being asked is what informed the decision to announce the compensation plan?
Could that have been prompted by the negative public backlash triggered by the demolitions?
There have been continuous misgivings about government’s futile attempts at distancing itself from the demolitions. A promised compensation suggests remorse of sorts, for which reason any loss accruing therefrom should be actionable. Financial loss would be recorded when compensations are paid. Could the suspected investor be responsible for the compensation and who is he, her or they?
Ghanaians would want to especially know who gave the final go-ahead for the demolitions to take place and what were the contents of the national security briefings to the President on the subject?
The foregone has become necessary because of the futile attempt at distancing the President from the action.
Will taxpayers be responsible for the compensation package? Will Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT), sole shareholder of the Labadi Beach Hotel, be responsible for the compensation?
Whichever way the taxpayers’ money will be used directly or otherwise in the so-called compensation arrangement, is the cause of our worry and Ghanaians.
At the time Jakpa was throwing his weight about as Director of Special Operations, including demolitions and reckless ransacking of residences of former government appointees and threatening recently to level the structures, his hirer the President did not call him to order.
Whoever is responsible for the preparation of the national security briefings for the President perhaps did not include this in the write-up, which is doubtful anyway.
Now that the damage has been inflicted, the non-starter of a compensation is on the table.
A compensation for a reckless action when teachers are on a strike action over unpaid remunerations is foolish.
Actions undertaken recklessly are never done right, the repercussions of which is the La Beach demolitions.