He explained that such rivalry encouraged parties in opposition to simply oppose and discredit the government of the day which had also led to abandonment of projects initiated by preceding governments irrespective of rel­evance and how much had been put into it.

“This rivalry has led to aban­donment of projects initiated by preceding governments irrespec­tive of relevance and how much has been put into it and has also led to short-sighted approach to progress, growth and devel­opment,” Prof. Agyeman-Duah noted.

Speaking on the topic: ‘Get­ting it Right after 30 years-My Case for Constitutional Review,’ he said organisation of political parties, electoral politics in the country had been heavily mon­etised, with highest bidder often winning elections, cost of partici­pation and embedded corruption in party politics had excluded many individuals with promise, whether young or old.

Prof. Agyeman-Duah indicat­ed that another key area where party democracy seemed to have flopped was with actualisation of political participation because the 1992 Constitution invested so much power in the Executive at the expense of the other arms of Government, with presidential appointments becoming means to creating jobs for family, friends, members of the party and friends in Parliament.

Oliver Barker-Vormawor, Legal Practitioner and Researcher, point­ed out that the 1992 Constitution had failed to deliver to the citi­zenry the blessings of prosperity and equal opportunity and rather allowed select few to prosper at the expense of all.

He intimated that the 1992 Constitution should not be consid­ered as untouchable and called for a new Constitution to restore faith in the “project Ghana” however, a new Constitution was a process, not an event, an opportunity to re­build societies’ beliefs and desires for change from the ground to the top.

“The Constitution of the nation is much more than a simple road traffic law, it carries with it trust, confidence, hopes and aspi­rations of citizens when they have lost belief and hope, when they are no longer compelled by moral authority of the document, the Constitution has lost its rhythm.

“It will forever mean little to the Executive that swears an oath to uphold it and to the Judiciary that is called upon to interpret it, yet undermines it at every oppor­tunity, when we call for a new con­stitution, we are calling for more than gathering of few lawyers to produce for us another document without a soul but document of our own making,” Mr Baker-Vor­mawor decried.