In our motherland, the law of laws says the one who ‘shall take precedence over all persons’ (57(2)) must have ‘attained the age of forty years’ (62(b)).
Now, someone who had attained forty years plus fourteen and took precedence over us all is peeved by that law and is fretting all over its existence.
He does not understand why someone who ‘has attained the age of twenty-one years’ (94(a)) can be a member of parliament’ but the same person cannot be the first citizen.
There are two groups of people I wouldn’t recommend for president. Those, who have not lived demonstrably worthy lives and academics. Living a worthy life means you have worked for someone or yourself, built a house and are taking responsibility for a family of wife and children and or parents or siblings. Or, you should have paid rent, electricity and water bills.
In other words, for capacity to take care of a whole nation, you should have actually taken care of people.
As for academics, when they emerge from their proverbial ivory tower comfort zone into the real world of realpolitik they get dazed and fumble with policy and programmes. Academic leader teams have included Busia, Limann and after him Mills.
Their governments were like the coup d’etat governments, largely civil servant run which the latter have loved to do with coup governments.
The one motherland pilot, who has been touted so positively more than anyone else, was forty-two when he became Leader of Government Business, forty-eight when he became Prime Minister and fifty-one when he became the first to assume the title President.
Ankrah (51), Afrifa (33), Busia (43), Acheampong (41), Akuffo (42), Rawlings (32), Limann (45), Kufuor (63), Mills (65), Mahama (54) and Akufo-Addo (73) followed as heads of government.
The under-40s wreaked havoc before attempting some mending.
Our youth-for-president campaigners, who usually measure our motherland’s progress against development crawling motherlands, are citing developed motherland young leaders as role models.
Maybe they should do within-motherland scientific comparative analysis to prove that point. I can say offhand that the recent young leaders of Britannia and Italia did not do the best for their motherlands.
A Macron success call is too early. Remember, though, that he had lived a life as a self-made millionaire before entering politics with a clear vision of president-as-entrepreneur.
I wonder which of the listed motherland presidential ages Mr 54 when he assumed the motherland leadership mantle, has a beef with.
I don’t know if he is unwittingly trying to castigate himself as too old at 54 to have caused his abysmal performance as the motherland president.
My compatriots, let each of you take each of the former leaders along with their age to see whether they performed well as leaders or not.
By the time you finish, you are most likely to pooh-pooh the idea of age 40 is too old to be president. These are presidents or leaders, that is, individuals, who headed governments, as president first citizen or prime minister second citizen. But, perhaps, a broader look at governments or ministers would be more helpful. Taking note of average ages of governments and considering outliers alongside, would be the more scientific approach to establishing whether age has had anything to do with successful or failed governing of our motherland.
I still maintain age is inconsequential when determining leadership capacity and promise.
If people choose to be so unwise to vote for a toddler as president, let them enjoy the consequences of her or his rule. After all in 2012, we were supposed to have elected a ‘young’ compatriot (age) to become president. We chose him over an ‘old man’ (age). Today, everyone knows the results: dums?, unbridled corruption and nation wrecking.
Before the fifty something less than an achiever, a sexagenarian had taken us from HIPC to lower middle income in seven years with free bus ride for school children, capitation grant, NHIS, NYEP, schools for children with disabilities never closed for want of public funds, and many others.
All of that disappeared, including shutting schools for children with disabilities for unremitted public funds, under the younger president.
So if you are not with me that in leadership age is far less important than lives people live before becoming leader, ?y? wo ankasa wo gyegyiregye (it’s left to you and your conscience).
Some say age is just a number; implying it is what it’s carrier has made of it. My view, which makes anyone trying to make an issue with age incurring my beef, is that leadership, especially of a motherland is about life lived and its quality.
If living a life has been hard work and an accompanying achievement, one is likely to succeed. Anything else will be like it was not long ago.
By Kwasi Ansu-Kyeremeh