Has Nana Addo receive a car gift too?

What is it that people are saying? Is it a mere equalization?

Please can someone in the Elephant family come out to clear or kill the pervasive rumour that says Nana Addo also received a car gift from a contractor in 2008 as the flagbearer of the NPP?

It may sound benign, but if the interpretations given by prominent Ghanaians that such gifts are meant to corrupt statesmen are anything to go by, then we must protect the "enviable corrupt-less" record of Nana Addo by not putting him in the presidency where trouble lurks in the dark for him, for, the gift contractor may only be waiting patiently to demand his pound of flesh from him.

Let us not forget that the issue that hangs around the neck of our president - John Dramani Mahama - took place when he was not the substantive president. Let us also note that though the president did not register the Ford Expedition car in his personal name, but gave it out to the state, critics still believed that his hands were soiled and they would never be charitable with their criticisms of the president.

The NPP parliamentarians have even threatened to impeach him.

In the case of Nana Addo, we were told that he also was not the president when he received the gift, yet he was a flagbearer and for that matter a potential president. Again, when he allegedly received this gift, he did not donate it to his party, the NPP. Rather, he caused it to be registered in his own name - GE 1466 Z, and till today, it still remains his cherished property.

Of great importance to this debate is the latest revelation of Abacha giving former President Rawlings US$5m for what we are not told, but he accepted that the gift was only US$2m and I am yet to read from somewhere whether he put the money into the government purse. This story has however expanded the frontiers of corruption definition in Ghana and set the higher moral grounds for our statesmen, leaving the corruption credentials of ex-president Rawlings badly bruised.

Lest I forget, the ex-President Rawlings who was almost a standard in his own right, declared Nana Addo as a "corrupt-less" person, yet opined that corruption in NDC began under the late Professor John Evans Atta Mills. Ironically, when Professor Mills was a president, he refused to accept even Christmas hampers and was vehemently criticized by Ghanaians for doing what is uncivilized and ‘un-ghanaian’.

For me, it is rather President John Dramani Mahama and his predecessor, Professor John Evans Atta Mills, who are and have resisted the temptation of corruption in office as elucidated by ex-president John Agyekum Kufour.

At least, JDM has caused a paradigm shift from our culture of handling gifts. He caused it to be recorded in a gift book, and resisted the craving of personal ownership of it.

Education: In some countries, gifts are forbidden. They are considered as instruments of corruption and must be rejected outright. In other countries, gifts are symbols of friendship and it is rude to reject them.

For us in Ghana, gifts have a cosmopolitan background. Whilst invariably one is forbidden to go into the King's palace empty handed, gifts are also considered symbols of appreciation and reconciliation. In most cases, the poor are inclined to give gifts to the reach in society more than the reverse. When a perceived rich person refuses to take a gift from the "poor", the giver feels emotionally hurt.

After all, the Holy Bible does not frown on gifts, but it seriously condemns bribery and corruption. It says in Acts 20:35 "It is more blessed to give than to receive". Perhaps, this is the more reason why many people, especially the less privileged in society are motivated to give gifts even though they may have nothing for themselves and families.

Now, in a global village that we live in today with the confluence of diverse cultural practices, management writers have managed to find a middle of the road approach to handling gifts so that the act does not bring negative emotions whilst preventing it from becoming a strong vehicle for corruption.

A public office holder can accept gifts, however, this gifts must be recorded in a gifts book.

The reason for recording a gift in a gifts book is to protect the receiver from future blackmail. It also serves as an insulator of the office-holder becoming unduly indebted to the giver.

A reflection: In the light of the above, where did our president go wrong? Perhaps, he stands accused for going against his own ethical code of conduct for public office holders. Such officers according to the president’s strategy against corruption are not to receive gifts of value exceeding US$50. Why then did he received a gifts in the thousands of dollars?

Someone asked these questions: "is it not possible that the president's decision to cap gifts for ministers and other public officers at US$50 was to for once draw the line in the sand where citizens and non-citizens would never contemplate offering so much gifts to public officers as he experienced when he was a vice president?

Has president Kufour not hinted that the presidency is a place of temptation for corruption? Would the president not take a clue from his mentor that even Christmas gifts could be a package loaded for corruption?

With these welter of evidences, what else could the president have done not to fall into those traps applying the old adage that “if a snake would not bite you, it would not snarl at you?” Well, these are not for me to answer for the president. He is capable of his own explanations. We must also not forget that our jurisprudence recognizes the fact that the law does not take a retrospective effect if we decided to measure the president's act or omissions against his own strategy against corruption.

In conclusion, I would say that it may not be advisable to vote for Nana Addo after all because Ghanaians would love to keep and protect at least one "incorruptible politician" (courtesy Rawlings’ evaluation) as a political reference point in Ghana, since he has already taken a gift from a contractor who may be waiting patiently to pester him in office to reciprocate his gesture, not forgetting that he is fortunate not be “corrupted”. He was bruised but not destroyed, the wise may say.

Fellow Ghanaians, think about these things when you go to the polls on November 7, 2016.