Erasing History

They are unassuming buildings tucked between the Regional Coordinating Council and the Ghana Aids Commission. From afar, one is provoked to think of them as a conglomerate of old, abandoned, missionary classroom blocks. Closer up, one realizes that the only modern thing about these buildings is the signboard above the southern block – “Public Records and Archives Department (PAAD)”. Each time I come here, I can’t believe it; that, the repository of history should look this way – ugly, old, neglected and just plainly, falling apart. It’s even more sobering that the Regional Coordinating Council – stately, modern and imperial even – is beside this one. The contrast is clear for all to see; but siting, side by side, buildings of contrasting beauties also reels a deeper meaning which is so obvious that many eyes subconsciously ignore it: that we really do not care about history or its preservation.

And for a time now in 2021, this frightening truth has been the source of my constant, unending disillusion with many issues which have become meat for public debate. I see clearly, the horrifying scapegoating of historical continuity, a truncation of the past from the present, as it were. I hear the jest that meets rigorous intellectual thinking that strives to draw attention to the crude forms of pseudo-modernity, religious fundamentalism and cultural nationalism on display. And I simply ask myself: Since when did anti-intellectualism become this sexy? I feel the burden of constantly having to re-educate people about the dangers of the things they take for granted. Of course, this is the advice they won’t take. In a lot of ways, I feel I am being punished for reading too much; for taking the reading lists a bit too personally; and for trying to make out the logic and meaningfulness of the text as well as the ramifications they have for life and dignity. However, the warning is always there. A society that does not constantly remind itself of its history is doomed. I can understand why this is so. Intellectual curiosity is unrewarding.  Pretentiousness and an over-inflated sense of oneself in the grand scheme of affairs are all one needs to prosper.

That this should be true for lawyers and law students should be a dreaded prospect. Lawyers have a role to play in preserving a legal system that provides equal opportunity to all people regardless of the origins of their personhood. Yet, people have read Constitutional Law but do not know the circumstances under which Akoto was arrested or Akorsah freed or even the origins of the rights provisions in our Supreme Law. People have read Human Rights but still, believe everybody must worship Jesus Christ or be compelled to do so. People have read Criminal Law but think it is alright for paedophiles and men with no legitimate value systems to take advantage of young girls. Why? Because the law, as currently taught, is abstract, unfeeling and ill-equipped to help people fight injustice. The creeping of scientific methods into the study of law has made its study a dry enterprise. One is only supposed to memorize as many rules as can be recalled in an exam. This just doesn’t make any sense.

The use of unnecessary Latin words like “ratio decidendi”, “dictum” etc obscure the faces behind cases. Cases decide lives. Cases are people. Thus, in the teaching of law, it is extremely important that the history behind laws is studied as a way of shining fluorescent light on these laws. One understands the law better that way. I am one of those who subscribe to the view that law has no substantive content. It is the stylistic expression of some other field of human endeavor in a way that escalates the application of it to everyone.

In short, I am saying that legal studies should be more inter or multi-disciplinary. It is just that important.