All these associates of our leader are seeking assistance, help, cooperation and support to prosecute their political agenda. Various activities, actions, projects and plans are being undertaken to ensure victory or rather declaration of victory in favor of our leader. As a result, various contacts have been established between commanders of our Security Services at all levels with the political authorities from national through regional to district levels.
Scheduled and impromptu meetings have been taking place between these commanders and the ruling party’s chain of command. In most of these meetings, the appropriate compliant permanent and non-permanent officials of the electoral body have been roped in as willing partners.
Under the guise of national, regional and district Electoral Security Task Forces, these “fit-for-role” meetings have been taking place. Plans are for advanced in ensuring that only security personnel who are very loyal to the ruling party are sent to the classified electoral areas. Various locations have been flagged into green, yellow and red zones. The green zones represent strong holds or comfortable areas for the ruling party.
Yellow Zones represent “swing” areas or “either way” electoral areas. It means those areas could fall for either the ruling party or the largest opposition party. The red zones represent comfortable areas (strong-holds) for the enemy.
Commanders of all the security services were tasked to assess their subordinates and submit special reports on them. The respective commanders were to indicate against the names of their subordinates their loyalty or otherwise to us. All the infantry Battalions in all the Garrisons were tasked to categorize their troops along those lines.
This task has been accomplished and the Commanding Officers, the Regional Ministers and District or Municipal Chief Executives have earmarked certain soldiers for special duties in the specific areas-constituencies and electoral areas.
The military Commanders, in particular, and the political leaders have already mapped out their strategies and tactics in order to facilitate ‘rigging’ for us in the rural communities in particular and other areas where opportunities may exist.
Thus, whereas soldiers estimated or assessed to be loyal to our cause would be sent to any of the coloured zones- that is green, yellow and red-those believed to be against us would be made to stay in barracks as part of the stand-by group. These stand-by persons may never have the opportunity to be part of any operation, especially “OPERATION PEACE TRAIL” or “OPERATION ELECTIONS or “OPERATION ELECT US”
Similar or same strategies and tactics have been adopted by the other sister security services.
For instance, Police, Prisons, Fire Service and Immigration personnel for duties on election day at Polling Stations have been carefully selected to ensure that only “loyal personnel” are made to man the Polling Stations, escort electoral and election materials from national through regional to distinct/municipal levels and vice versa.
The hope is that these security personnel, who would be well armed to the teeth would turn blind eyes to nefarious activities of our members while at the same time would be intimidating and preventing or seeing to the counting and protection of the ballot.
Thus, as part of the grand agenda of 2016, security personnel from all the Security Services would facilitate rigging for us while at the same time would be denying the opposition parties, the opportunity to maximize their political fortunes.
Some commanders have been shown to and made to fraternize with our ministers, appointees, executive members and agents over the last few months. Rehearsals have been and are being conducted involving officials of our party, EC and security personnel in the already zoned areas.
In the scheme of events, commands, orders and instructions of all kinds would be issued by these non-military personnel to the security personnel. Some of these commands, orders and instructions would be issued directly to the security personnel in the “theatres of war” (electoral battle grounds).
In other cases, where feasible, commands, orders, instructions and directives would be channeled through the appropriate security chain of command.
From whatever angle one looks at these commands, orders, instructions or directives emanating from civilians relating to elections and not core military duties, there are possible and probable violations of military customs, traditions, practices and rules of engagement.
Most of these “orders” would constitute unlawful command.What are or may constitute unlawful commands?
Firstly, we may have to know what lawful commands are. The case of the military would be used to explain lawful commands and then be exclusion, unlawful commands would be known.
Disobedience of lawful command is an offence in the military and all security services.
Section 23 of the Armed Forces Act, 1962 provides:
“Every person who disobeys a lawful command of a superior officer shall be guilty of an offence and on conviction shall be liable to imprisonment for life or to any less punishment provided by this Act”
No charge of disobedience of lawful command will be valid if the command was given by a person below the rank of Lance –Corporal or Lance – Bombardier (Army) Leading Rating (Navy) or Corporal (Air Force).
The expression ‘Superior Officer” is defined in Section 98 of the Armed Forces Act, 1962, to mean any officer or man who, in relation to any other officer or man is by that Act, or by regulation or by custom of the appropriate force authorized to give a lawful command to the other officer or man.
It is further stated that a service tribunal should be satisfied, before conviction, that the accused knew that the person with respect to whom the offence prescribed in this section was committed, was a superior officer. If the superior did not wear the insignia of his rank and was not personally known to the accused, evidence would be necessary to show that the accused was otherwise aware that he was his superior officer.
To establish an offence of disobedience of a lawful command, it is necessary to prove non-compliance with a command i.e. disobedience. The disobedience must relate to the time when the command is to be obeyed and may arise from the failure to comply at once with a command which requires prompt and immediate obedience, or a failure to take a proper opportunity to carry out a command which requires compliance sometime in the future. A person must therefore have, and fail to take the opportunity of carrying out command before it is an offence under Section 22 of the Armed Forces Act, 1962.
A command, in order to be lawful must be one relating to military duty i.e. the disobedience of which must tend to impede, delay or prevent a military proceeding. A superior officer has the right to give a command for the purpose of maintaining good order or suppressing a disturbance or for the execution of military duty or regulation or for a purpose connected with the welfare of troops or for any generally accepted details of military life.
He has no right to take advantage of his military rank to give a command which does not relate to military duty or usage or which has for its sole object the attainment of some private end.
The Armed Forces Act categorically states that a civilian cannot give a “lawful command” to members of the service but it may well be the duty of an officer or man to do the act indicated.
The command must be a lawful one. For example, an officer or man is justified in refusing to bolt away with a ballot box and election materials in order to facilitate rigging by my people if he considers it to be incorrect even if ordered to do so by his Commanding Officer, a Regional Minister or the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission.
It is clear from the above military illustrations that officers and men may or shall refuse unlawful commands that are related to the conduct of elections themselves and not military duties aimed at ensuring peace and order at the places where elections are taking or have taken place.
Intelligence reports reaching us indicate that “Civilians” and military commanders at all levels of the political and military hierarchy have been compromised to give all sorts of commands, orders, instructions, directions and directives to security personnel (members of our community) to facilitate rigging for us and effectively deny the largest opposition party and others any opportunities of challenging or resisting these manipulations because we are not done stealing cars and monies meant for end of year parties.
I am calling on all patriotic and nationalistic members of our community to resist all such unlawful commands and to arise for the positive change that is coming or it’s happening already thus no change must happen?
All security personnel must think of Ghana first before any political party- be it that of our Commander-In-Chief or that of Nana Addo’s. We should resist all.
Various forms of unlawful commands are to be given to members of the security services in order to deny impending and well deserved electoral victory for the NPP and its two most popular leaders; Nana Akufo-Addo and Dr. Alhaji Mahamadu Bawumiah, they have been cooked and already to be served to us from the scheme of things.
Members of our community should behave as the pure and fine professionals that they are. They should be truly neutral in the political contests. The members of our Security Services must be and be seen to be independent and impartial in the forthcoming Presidential and Parliamentary Elections.
The independence and impartiality of our security services must be and must be seen to be apparent on individual and institutional basis. That is each and every member of the Security Services must show his independent mind as well as being part of the independence and impartiality of the Security institutions.
Members of the Security Services should act boldly, courageously and professionally without fear or favour.
Even though this state of independence and impartiality of the Security Services and their personnel may be difficult to achieve especially with respect to their heads (such as the CDS, IGP, Director General Prisons, Director Immigration Service, Chief Fire Officer, Chiefs of Army, Naval and Air Staffs, Commissioners of Police, Directors and Assistant Directors of Prisons and Immigration, Director, Deputy Director and Assistant Directors of BNI), the rank and file may be able to maintain the integrity of the Security Services to preserve peace and order in Ghana.
Members of our Security Services should draw on their experiences in our neighboring countries which have witnessed wars occasioned by electoral disputes and struggle for political power.
The nation state Ghana is stronger and more important than any sectional interest. The over ambition of some of our leaders even makes the devil brink.
NB: TO MY ESTATE DEVELOPER GENERAL….I GREET YOU OOOOOO…..IN 2012, 265 VEHICLES WERE ALLOCATED FOR OP PEACE TRAIL, HOW MANY DO WE HAVE THIS YEAR….IS IT LESS OR MORE THAN WHAT WE RECEIVED LAST FOUR YEAR?
EISH…IS IT TRUE THAT OUR NEW DEFENCE ADVISORS AS PER OUR JULY 1 2016 ARE STILL IN TOWN?