.

postcolonial violence, but its archive maps the economic, political, and social fault lines that persist within Ghana. The NRC was supposed to unearth, finally, the truth about the national history, but its cacophonous archive resists any effort to distill a unified or singular narrative. The truth that emerges most clearly is about the salience and politics of difference within Ghana. Why, and how, does the Ghana’s NRC archive so persistently transgress the boundaries of its creation? Answering this question requires consideration of the volatility of individual testimony as a tool of public history.

      The TRC format—in South Africa, in Canada, even in Greensboro, North Carolina—is based on the assertion that the voices of ordinary people have been overlooked and are necessary when pursuing the past. However, no one knows what people will actually say. In valorizing individual testimony by seeking out, publicizing, and preserving people’s voices, Ghana created a complex and contradictory archive marked both by citizen desire and government power. Of course, as described above, neither the petition-making process nor the public hearings allowed for the unconstrained expression of citizen voices. Structural constraints, from economic need to gendered fears, limited citizen participation. Statement takers transmitted and translated citizen stories, often marking (sometimes physically) the documents that the NRC preserved. In the hearings, citizen stories were judged, disbelieved, and sometimes dismissed. Nevertheless, the power of people’s voices within Ghana’s public history-writing project cannot be overlooked. As people ventured forth to tell these stories despite all manner of risk, oral history’s rejection of the truth/lie dichotomy in favor of considering all the ways citizen testimonies speak volumes is a guiding thread.

      CHAPTER 2

      Human Rights and Ghanaian History

      [Ghana’s history] has been chequered with little improvement in the welfare of the ordinary people who have borne the brunt of maladministration and incompetence of their successive leaders, leaders who promised heavens but found it difficult to make even the earth a comfortable place to live in.

      —Lord Cephas Mawuko-Yevugah “Who’s Playing Politics with National Reconciliation” December 3, 2001

      On March 6, 1957, when Gold Coast threw off the cloak of British colonialism, the country was both harbinger and hope of what the “winds of change” sweeping across Africa might wreak.¹ Far beyond its own borders, the West African nation’s political independence was both a triumph and talisman. “Ghana tells us that the forces of the universe are on the side of justice,” thundered Martin Luther King Jr. “It symbolizes … that an old order is passing away and a new order is coming into being.”² In South Africa, antiapartheid activists looked to the newly independent country as a source of succor, both existential and material.³ If Ghana’s birth “demonstrate[d] … the ability of people born and bred in Africa and native to her ancient soil to govern themselves with efficiency and the dignity of democracy,” what should be made the country’s post-colonial political troubles?⁴ In its turbulent passage through the twentieth century Ghana has been a “particularly poignant” emblem of both the hope and disillusionment of African independence.⁵

      This chapter briefly sketches the contours of Ghana’s national history. Unlike other accountings, I place the question of human rights abuse and the stories gathered by Ghana’s National Reconciliation Commission (NRC) at the center of this narration. Approaching Ghana’s story in this way seems to fly in the face of the country’s contemporary image as a place of peace and stability. As in the past, Ghana continues to be a potent political symbol—but the prevailing narrative is no longer about Pan-African liberation but about the possibility of African “success” in the global neoliberal economic order. From the New York Times’s declaration of Ghana as “a good kid in a bad neighborhood” to the World Bank’s insistence that the country is poised to join the ranks of middle-income countries to the flood of articles about Accra as a cosmopolitan, creative hub, Ghana’s star is on the rise.⁶ (Apparently, “Accra’s Jamestown is electric—it’s like Hackney Wick on steroids.”⁷) Without undermining Ghana’s considerable achievements, this praise—comparative, marked by low expectations, and based on neoliberal rubrics of progress (GDP, consumption, friendliness to global capital)—eludes the experiences of the majority of Ghana’s people. A human rights history, on the other hand, excavates the human suffering that has accompanied Ghana’s story and uses it to interrogate the national political trajectory.

      Table 1. Governments of Ghana after Independence

Dates	Leader(s)	Party
March 6, 1957–February 24, 1966	Kwame Nkrumah	Convention People’s Party (CPP)
February 24, 1966–October 1, 1969	Akwasi Afrifa Joseph Ankrah J. W. K. Harlley Emmanuel Kotoka B. A. Yakubu Albert Ocran Anthony K. Deku J. E. O. Nunoo	National Liberation Council (NLC)
October 1, 1969–January 13, 1972	Kofi Busia	Progress Party (PP)
January 13, 1972–October 9, 1975 October 9, 1975–July 5, 1978 July 5, 1978–June 4, 1979	Ignatius Kutu Acheampong Ignatius Kutu Acheampong Fred Akuffo	National Redemption Council (NRC) Supreme Military Council Supreme Military Council
June 4, 1979–September 24, 1979	Jerry John Rawlings	Armed Forces Revolutionary Council
September 24, 1979–December 31, 1981	Hilla Liman	People’s National Party (PNP)
December 31, 1981–January 7, 1993	Jerry John Rawlings	Provisional National Defence Council (PNDC)
January 7, 1993–January 7, 2001	Jerry John Rawlings	National Democratic Congress (NDC)
January 7, 2001–January 7, 2009	John Agyekum Kufuor	New Patriotic Party (NPP)
January 7, 2009–July 24, 2012	John Atta Mills	National Democratic Congress (NDC)
July 24, 2012–January 7, 2017	John Dramani Mahama	National Democratic Congress (NDC)
January 7, 2017–	Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo	New Patriotic Party (NPP)

      The NRC was not the first (nor the last) time when citizens used the language of international human rights as a lens through which to parse the substance and content of freedom in Ghana. The first part of this chapter explores the way human rights was utilized by Ghana’s government, labor unions, journalists and others during the first ten years of national independence. Human rights was and still is a mutable language deployed for myriad ends by different communities within Ghana and beyond. Its power was and still is in the attempt to mobilize a supra-national moral standard to describe, challenge, and condemn political violence. “Rights talk” in Ghana’s early independence period was inherently politically fraught; it was an invitation to consider if, when and how state violence become untenable—and what to do about it. Accordingly, a human rights history of Ghana is not a narrative of moral absolutes and bright lines; we are not entering the “world