UGCC on the wrong side of history

Ekow Nelson

Last Friday the organisers of Ghana@60 commemorated the founding of the United Gold Coast Convention (UGCC) in Saltpond, positioning it as an overlooked significant national event. The founding of a political party with no notable accomplishments is being touted as Ghana’s Birthday along with, or perhaps, instead of, March 6th, 1957. Sadly, the current President lent the authority of his office to a commemorative farce that flies in the face of historical truth.

False starts with no accomplishments
It is argued that the founding of the UGCC represents the conception of Ghana’s independence struggle. But is it? When exactly did the anti-colonial struggle begin? It certainly is not 4th August 1947. Prior to that there was the Aborigines Rights Protection Society and the National Congress of British West Africa, preceded by the Fante Confederacy and many others. As Professor Emmanuel Kwaku Senah has argued, “national histories do not have starts; just major confluences of powerful factors and strong personalities”.

Even if we accept the UGCC as the harbinger of the anti-colonial struggle where in the world, or in our lives, is conception equally or more important than birth? For all the over-sized claims made on its behalf, the UGCC contributed nothing tangible to our independence struggle. Any objective assessment, stripped of all the emotional guff, shows that, except for the consequential decision to recruit Nkrumah as its General Secretary, the UGCC was a colossal failure. And here is why.

The multiple struggles at UGCC’s birth
After the second world war and demobilisation when the colonial authorities shut down military bases in Ghana, returnee soldiers found themselves without jobs or decent incomes. With soaring inflation and shortages of consumer goods, public confidence in the Gold Coast government began deteriorating.

At the same time the Gold Coast’s cocoa industry, the primary source of income for the exchequer, was ravaged by the swollen-shoot disease and the government’s policy of cutting-out acres of trees with no compensation exacerbated farmer disenchantment.

The desperate voices of large swathes of the disaffected population were ignored by the political class, including the Joint Provincial and Legislative Councils, until Nii Kwabena Bonnne II, Osu Alata Mantse, emerged to lead large public protests against steep hikes in the prices of consumer goods.

It was in this milieu that the UGCC was formed by the African political elite and failed politicians. While it quickly garnered public support in Kibi and major coastal towns of Saltpond, Accra, Cape Coast and Sekondi, in the words Aiken Watson KC., of the eponymous Gold Coast commission he chaired, “the U.GC.C. did not really get down to business until the arrival of Mr Nkrumah on 16 December 1947” who was singularly responsible for broadening the appeal of the movement across the country.

On the wrong side of history

Nkrumah’s arrival coincided with Nii Kwabena Bonnne’s widespread boycott of mostly, foreign-owned trading firms. After a month of protests in early 1948 the Association of West African Merchants (AWAM) whose members were most impacted by the boycott, negotiated an end to the protests due to come into effect on 28th February 1948.

The shooting of Sgt. Adjetey, Private Odartey Lamptey and Corporal Attipoe during the ex-servicemen march to the Castle on that same day, however, triggered rioting in Accra. Shops and offices owned by foreigners were attacked and looted and violence soon spread to other towns. Faced with widespread disorder, Governor Sir Gerald Creasy declared a state of emergency, troops were called out and police arrested the ‘trouble makers’ earning them the dubious sobriquet of the ‘Big Six’. But the UGCC leaders quickly distanced themselves from the riots blaming them on their new General Secretary

While Kwame Nkrumah and Dr. Danquah had addressed the ex-servicemen at a rally in Accra on 20th February 1948 where their petition to the Governor was drafted, leaders of UGCC did not anticipate or plan the 1948 riots.

The riots and disorder, however, led to the appointment of the Watson Commission to investigate the causes and make recommendations. As the noble Lord Rennell conceded in 1952 “[t]he inevitable consequence of their Report was the appointment of the Coussey Committee to consider constitutional developments in the Gold Coast” whose result was “the promulgation by Order in Council of the new Constitution of the Gold Coast” in 1951.

In other words, there is a direct line from Nii Kwabena Bonne’s boycotts, the shooting of the three ex-servicemen, the riots that followed and Watson, to the establishment of the Coussey Committee that produced the 1951 constitution which in turn led to the first all-African elections with the broadest franchise in the country’s history and the first All-African government. And none of these enabling events for Ghana’s independence was orchestrated or led by the UGCC.

The failure of the UGCC
The UGCC only positioned itself for a share of the spoils of the1948 riots it repudiated and jumped on the bandwagon to draft the 1951 constitution under Sir Henley Coussey. This was their chance, they believed, to ensure Nkrumah disappeared from the political scene. Nkrumah and Trades Unions were excluded from the Committee who skewed the election rules in favour of the UGCC.

But even with the scales tipped in their favour, the UGCC managed to botch the elections and the CPP won by a massive landslide. After they lost, they started undermining the very constitution they had drafted with prominent members (William Ofori Atta and Dr Danquah included) describing it as “bogus and fraudulent” as Nkrumah had, prior to the elections.

The mantle for carrying through the programme for self-government naturally passed to Nkrumah and the CPP government. This was momentous because with the demise of the star-studded but failed UGCC in the 1951 elections, Dr.Danquah’s command of Gold Coast politics ended and Nkrumah’s took off.

Dr. Danquah’s own contribution to the anticolonial struggle is not in dispute but that is not to be conflated with the UGCC. The UGCC was his last substantive political project and it failed and it ceased to exist after the elections. The rump reconstituted themselves into various opposition groups whose raison d’être was to stop Nkrumah from leading Ghana to independence. And they thwarted every effort to deliver the promise of self-government they committed themselves to in August 1947.

We can debate the start but not the end
Contrary to the revisionism being peddled, the UGCC was not the handmaiden of our independence: it was not the first or most significant in the anticolonial struggle; it was on the wrong side of every major issue in its short-lived existence and the wrong side of history.

In the words of Professor Senah, “[i]n the end, the foundations of Ghana crystallised around who was best able appreciate and marshal the historical forces unleashed between 1870s and the Second World War. It was Nkrumah who was to turn the aspirations of many who came before him – Mensah Sarbah, Caseley-Hayford Kobina Sekyi and Dr Danquah among others – into a concrete programme that finally secured Ghana’s independence.

We can debate who started the struggle for independence but we can’t dispute who achieved it. Surely, that alone should put this matter to rest.

Accra, 7th August 2017


About ekownelson

A Telecom Business Executive from London currently based in India. I am passionate about history and politics, business strategy, business model innovation and the evolution of information technology. Quite a mixed bag!
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to UGCC on the wrong side of history

  1. oberserber says:

    Reblogged this on The Ade Sawyerr Blog and commented:
    We can debate who started the struggle for independence but we can’t dispute who achieved it. Surely, that alone should put this matter to rest.

  2. Clive Osenda says:

    ….and correct me if I am wrong but at the time that Nkrumah was fighting the stalling tactics of the colonial rulers with demands for “Self-Government Now!”, didn’t most of his ex-UGCC colleagues morph into the United Party (UP) and attempt to sabotage the Independence movement by insisting that talk of Self-Government was premature, and that the Gold Coast was not quite ready for self-rule?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s