UNVEILING PRESIDENT JOHN MAHAMA IN "MY FIRST COUP D'ETAT"

When I first saw the book on our bookshelf at home, honestly, nothing moved me to pick it up and read. I had read “Dark Days in Ghana” by Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah and the dark picture I got about coup d’états was too much for me to handle. So another book on a coup d’état was a no go area for me. Little did I know I was missing out on what rather turned out to be an adventure in the days of yore intertwined with nuggets of wisdom and valuable lessons not to miss.

My husband recommended that I read the book after he had finished reading. That was when I remembered I had seen this book on the shelf before. We have a goal of reading at least fifty books this year so immediately he recommended, I booked a date with the author. I started reading this 318-page book on Thursday night and finished on Saturday morning. I could have finished on Friday night but for the “disturbance” from my roommate.  Even before I finished reading, I was convinced this was my best book yet.

“My First Coup D’état”, written by the former President of the Republic of Ghana, His Excellency John Dramani Mahama, tells of his childhood days and his experience with the first coup d’état which happened in Ghana on 24^th February, 1966. The book also journeys the reader through the writer’s teenage years, his family life, his first love, his youthful days and life experiences that plays with the reader’s emotions but leaves them with lessons and wisdom that are worth being bound around one’s neck and reflected upon, day and night.

The cover page of the book has the photograph of little Dramani Mahama (who later got the name John from his brothers). He dedicates the book to the memory of his father which is not surprising because of the immense role his father played in his life. His father was his pillar. His father knew his son held a lot of promise hence the decisions he made concerning little Dramani’s education.

He quotes a saying by Ben Okri, a Nigerian poet and novelist, on a fresh page which reads to illustrate the twists and turns his education and career took:

“We plan our lives according to a dream that came to us in our childhood, and we find that life alters our plans. And yes, at the end, from a rare height, we also see that our dream was our fate. It’s just that providence had other ideas as to how we would get there. Destiny plans a different route, or turns the dream around, as if it were a riddle, and fulfils the dream in ways we couldn’t have expected.”

This is a perfect description of the Ex-president’s life. One gets from the book that he always wanted to be a great person. From being able to stand alone and face Ezra the bully back in the boarding school, Achimota Primary School, to wanting to become a game warden because of their valiant personalities, there is no shadow of doubt that John Dramani Mahama had in him a personality that would later spur him on to greatness even if the road to his destiny was not clearly defined.

The seventeen-chapter book begins with an introduction that compares the African then to Africa today. It talks about the “lost decades” of Africa: a description that speaks to the dismal post-independence performance of African countries during the 1970s and 1980s into the early parts of the 1990s. The writer describes that moment as a time when Africa experienced what he calls a “brain drain”, that is, a mass exodus that found a great deal of artists, professionals, intellectuals, and politicians living abroad in either a forced or a self-imposed exile. Because of this what happened in those times in Ghana are not well-documented.  

The writer, however, is among the few who stayed in Ghana during the “lost decades” to tell the story later in this book: the story of the privileged moments of being a minister of state’s son, the story of the pain and unspoken trauma of having a father in detention for over a year, the rollercoaster of being chauffeured in the latest cars, and flying to Accra often in the 1960s, to being driven in the bucket of a cargo truck loaded with jute sacks, President Mahama tells them all.

The first chapter also represents the title of the book, “My First Coup D’état.” The writer was only seven years old when this happened on the 24^th day of February,1966. He was a student of Achimota primary school, then an elite boarding school of Accra.

He tells the sad story of how he waited for his father to pick him up on the day school vacated but he never showed up. Little Dramani had to sleep at school all by himself as a child. Unbeknownst to him, his father had been detained as a prisoner of politics the day after the coup. The heart wrenching part of the story is where his school guardian takes him to his father’s residence only to be met by a heavy presence of soldiers and policemen at his father’s residence. One of the soldiers tells the school guardian that Mr. E.A. Mahama, the writer’s father, no longer lives in that house.

One can imagine the confusion that will set in the mind of a seven-year old. He, however, tells his readers of how he did not cry that day, but later couldn’t hold back his tears in the days, weeks and months to come. Alas, a child can never battle tears no matter how hard he fights. They have to fall eventually.

The writer has many interesting stories he shares in his book. The stories that can make you laugh so hard that you keep going back to read those pages. A unique thing however in his writing is that as he makes you laugh, he places a seed of wisdom in your heart that will grow to help your situation if you nurture it well.

It also mocks subtly how religion takes advantage of the gullibility of its followers. He tells of his visits to Busunu, his maternal grandparents’ village, with his mother and brother, Alfred. The people of Busunu had a belief that once in a year on a particular night, their gods came down from their sacred places of abode to visit the village folks.

As tradition demanded, the indigenes were to kill their best goat or fowl and then use it to make a lavish meal for the gods. Being some kind gods, they allowed the people in the household to eat some of the food they prepared for the gods, but they had to leave the juiciest and the most desirable parts of the animal for the gods. The people had to leave these food offerings outside their compounds and were supposed to remain indoors all night. The belief was that the gods wielded whips and would cane anybody who was caught outside. On the nights the gods came, you could hear them walking through the streets and singing about how the spirits have whipped people who defied the orders of the land as they waved their whips.

Curious as he and his brother are, they decide on one of these occasions to be recalcitrant. They decide not to sleep but rather witness the gods’ procession through their grandmother’s window. Both attempting to see clearly, Dramani pushes his brother Alfred into a piece of furniture and that makes a loud sound. This draws the gods to their window to find out the source of that sound.

The two brothers crawl quietly into their bed and pull the covers over their heads. Then the gods at the window begin to talk to each other about the noise. The author and his brother recognise their uncle’s voice. He must be one of the gods. They confirm their suspicion when they visit their uncle the next day to find him and other elders sitting around and feasting on foods from bowls he and his brothers saw at people’s doorsteps the evening before. The brothers finally conclude that this supposed festival is actually a conspiracy by the elders to loot animals and food from the villagers one day every year. From this incident, the writer learns about how religion and spirituality had power over people and how others could easily use that to encourage trust and devotion or to control and engender fear.

President John Dramani Mahama is known for his “tika taka gangale” story, which he told at the 2012 NDC campaign launch at Mantse Agbona to illustrate the need for unity in the party. One discovers from his book that the story was first told to him and his brothers by Salifu, the watchman in their father’s house in Tamale.

During their stay in Tamale, John falls in love for the first time. Let’s call it the teenage love affair. He falls in love at first sight with Alice, the girl next door. The love for Alice sparks up the writing skills in John. Alice’s younger brother Thomas, who is John’s friend and a brother to Alice plays the “betweener”. John writes a letter to express his feelings, steals his stepmother’s perfume and douse the paper with the perfume, perhaps conveying a message of intense passion for her via the perfume.  Moonstruck, John hopes and prays the whole night that he is not bounced by Alice.

Apparently also enamoured of John, Alice replies John’s letter telling him how much she also likes him. Afa! As Ghanaians would say. Soon, John abandons his friend Thomas, and is always seen with Alice in the garden on Alice’s compound chatting heartily. School reopens and they have to part for a while. But “Romeo and Juliet” make a promise to each other to always keep in touch. They exchange letters whilst in school as a way of keeping the love burning.

As fate would have it, Alice’s father is transferred to another region for work. John the Romeo is filled with misery. Will the relationship work out between them?

The book, however, ends leaving readers disappointed. The death of E.A., Mahama and how his son ended up joining the party of the man who forced his father into exile in Cote d’Ivoire, Nigeria and later to the United Kingdom are not discussed. A reader who wants to know the transition from John Mahama’s return from the Soviet Union into politics is also disappointed.

The reader is not told how he met his current wife, Lordina, and also about his current family. He again does not tell us whether he and Alice crossed paths in their adult lives. As a woman at my age who still believes in Venice city of love and romanticism, I expected to read how John met Lordina and how she reminded him of what butterflies felt like.

It is indicated in his book that John Dramani is working on his second book but that is a cruel way of keeping the readers in suspense.

I can best describe His Excellency John Dramani Mahama as a raconteur who knows how get readers glued to his stories. As a historian, he has a rich style of telling the past in a professional yet exciting way that makes one yearn to read further to gain insight and understanding of issues. I recommend this great book to students of politics, history and above all to the Ghanaian who would love to know about the untold stories of the past.

DYING WITHOUT A WILL: When RIP means “Return If Possible!”

When Mrs. Thompson lost her husband, it was as if her world had come to an end. When she met him 25 years ago, he had just left middle school. She had no formal education at all. Together, they worked hard and invested in his education. He acquired his PhD three years before he died. A hard working trader, Mrs. Thompson made a greater contribution to the assets they owned. However, her husband died without a will and her grief was compounded by her husband’s family’s greed. They insisted on an equal share of the deceased’s property. On the instruction of the family head, the funeral donation was divided into three equal parts – one for Mrs. Thompson and the children of the man, one for the parents of her late husband and the rest went to the other family members. The same proposition was made regarding her late husband’s property. This left Mrs. Thompson devastated because in their most difficult moment, no member of her husband’s family was even prepared to give them a loan. And these are the very people who were to eat from her sweat. To her, it was unfair and unjust.

Fortunately, for Mrs. Thompson, a neighbour whispered to her that the the government had a law that would protect her interest and that of her children. He was referring to the Intestate Succession Law, 1985 (P.N.D.C.L.111). Mrs. Thompson’s joy in the law was, however, short-lived when she heard the details of the law. After her husband died, a woman surfaced with a set of 19-year old twins and claimed that her late husband was the father of the boys. The boys were a carbon copy of Mr. Thompson so no member of the family raised any objection. Not even Mrs. Thompson could doubt her. What she could not accept was how she and her children would share the property they had sacrificed and toiled to acquire with these complete strangers, strangers who reminded her of pain and betrayal.

The Intestate Succession Law, 1985 (P.N.D.C.L.111), was enacted to curb the injustices that were generated by the application of the customary laws of intestate succession where women and children were mostly left with either very little or nothing at all when the properties of the deceased were shared. Before this law came into being, the customary succession rules prevailed. A person’s properties were distributed in accordance with the family lineage system he belonged to; whether patrilineal or matrilineal.

Ethnics groups such as the Ewe, the Ga-Dangmes, the Guan, the Buem as well as most ethnic groups of the three regions of Northern Ghana are patrilineal. In this patrilineal family system, children of the deceased are entitled to inherit the man’s properties because they are considered a part of the man’s patrilineal family. The widow, however, is not considered a part of the man’s patrilineal family and so has no right of inheritance to any part of the husband’s properties if he died without a will.

The matrilineal family system, on the other hand, is practised mainly by the Akans, Tampolense and some parts of northern Ghana. Here, the children of the man are not considered a part of the man’s matrilineal family. They have no right to succeed the man’s properties if he dies without a will but they have a right to be catered for by their father’s successor. They also have the right to live in their father’s house but that is subject to good behaviour. As to how that good behaviour is determined, your guess is as good as mine! Here too, the woman is not considered a member of the man’s family and so has no right of inheritance.

It was the need to stop this injustice against women and children that led to the enactment of P.N.D.C. Law 111. In my view, however, this Law has not cured all the mischief presented by the customary laws and the injustice widows and children suffer when the man of the house dies. The law also came with its own set of complications and problems. Fortunately, our lawmakers have realized the many gaps in this law and the need to resolve them. This necessitated the drafting of the Intestate Succession Bill in 2009. As I write, this Bill is in Parliament, waiting to be passed into Law. The reason for its delay in parliament is not difficult to guess. It still has some ambiguous and controversial provisions over which lawmakers, as well as gender activists, are yet to reach a consensus.

Because of the inherent weaknesses in the law and its complications, no one should let the laws of Ghana distribute their properties on their behalf. In other words, don’t die without a will. The PNDCL 111 and its unborn child, the Intestate Succession Bill, are not as friendly as you might think. You cannot trust them in the same way you cannot trust your greedy family head to share your property.  

Weaknesses in PNDC Law 111

Section 3 of the PNDCL 111 provides that the household chattels of the deceased who died without a will shall be distributed to the surviving spouse(s) and the children and they shall all have equal interests in them.  Section 18 defines “household chattels” or movable property to include “jewellery, clothes, furniture and furnishings, refrigerator, television, radiogram, other electrical and electronic appliances, kitchen and laundry equipment, simple agricultural equipment, hunting equipment, books, motor vehicles other than vehicles used wholly for commercial purposes, and household livestock.”

The same section also defines a “child” to include “a natural child, a person adopted under a recognized law or under customary law relating to adoption and any person recognised by the deceased as his child or recognised by law to be the child of the deceased.” This is where the Pandora’s box of misunderstanding opens. How can two wives who are not on good terms agree to use the only vehicle the man left behind? How can the first wife, for instance, agree to sell the car and share the monetary value with the second wife when she (the first wife) contributed in purchasing that only vehicle the man left behind?

The provision also stipulates that all these items shall be given to the spouse(s) and children absolutely. This means they will have unquestionable and equal rights of ownership of the properties and can either distribute them to their successors or even give them out as gifts. How can one agree that the other should give their husband’s most cherished wrist watch to her child, for instance, and not the other woman’s child?

The Intestate Succession Bill has made a provision in clause 6 for the distribution of properties where the deceased left behind more than one spouse. The provision stipulates that 50% is to go to the surviving spouses, 40% to the surviving children, 5% to the surviving parent and 5% in accordance with customary law.

One does not need a prophet to predict confusion here. How will the household chattels, for instance, be shared based on these fractions? Let’s assume the two wives are fighting over their late husband’s car. Are we going to cut the car into two so that each person will take a half?

 Obviously, there will be chaos if this fraction idea is followed. And that means most of the items that were mostly cherished by the deceased that could have been kept by either spouse as memorabilia or even kept by the children would have to be sold to prevent disputes.

In a perfect case scenario, where the man married only one wife but had a child outside the marriage, like Mrs. Thompson who did not even know that her husband had “played an away match and scored a brace,” there may be conflicts as to who will keep what item. The Law has stated that the survivors have full interests in those items.

In Mrs. Thompson’s case, for instance, they had been together for over twenty-five years and she didn’t know her man had some nineteen-year-old twins somewhere. How can this woman share the man’s household chattels with these “strangers?” Would it not be awkward for one of the children to come and ask this widow for the keys to the man’s only car to cruise in town? The Law says the spouse and the children in this case all have absolute interests. Put simply, they all have equal shares in this property. How can they share without any dispute? Can she even have the heart to stand them after the betrayal of the husband and even the woman who introduced herself as the man’s cousin but was apparently warming his bed?

The proposed Bill, however, does not make any amendments to this provision. I guess conflicts on such chattels will go a long way till it gets to the Supreme Court.

Section 4 of PNDCL111 stipulates that where the property involves only one house, the spouse(s) and children shall be entitled to that house and they shall hold it as co-owners. This sounds like a good idea in cases where the deceased and his spouse built their dream house and lived in alone with their kids. It would not even be an issue where the surviving spouse later decides to devolve or give the house to the children.

The problem arises when the deceased had a child outside the marriage. The obvious question is whether the surviving spouse and her stepchild would want to live together and hold interests in that house as co-owners. This argument almost always ends up in court and the ultimate solution will be to sell the house and share the proceeds.

In most cases the intruder, who had a child with the man and who is not recognised by the law, uses the child to indirectly fight for her share in the man’s property. So Mrs. Thompson will end up sharing what she and her late husband toiled to acquire with the woman her husband had an affair with.

Luckily, the Intestate Succession Bill provides in clause 8 that “the surviving spouse is to have fifty percent (50%) share in the matrimonial home and where the spouse has contributed to the acquisition of the matrimonial home, an additional share will be added to the fifty percent (50%) share.” Another problem arises here too. How can it be proven that, indeed, the other spouse contributed to the acquisition of the house? The onus is on the person who alleges to prove. But how can the surviving spouse prove that they contributed, if they did not keep receipts of the building materials they purchased towards the building of the house? Or how can they prove in a situation where the wife rather took care of other responsibilities while her husband channelled all his resources into building the house?

It is in such circumstances that Lord Denning LJ, in the case of Rimmer v Rimmer [1953] 1 QB 63, held that any property that was acquired in the marriage should be shared 50-50 upon dissolution of the marriage. In his reasoning, where a man saved and the woman worked and used her earnings to cater for the family, it was for a common benefit and thus whatever was acquired with the man’s savings belonged to both the man and his wife. This principle was applied by the Court of Appeal in the Ghanaian case of Mensah v Mensah [1997-98] 2 GLR 193, when the court was deciding the ownership of the matrimonial home upon divorce. It seems the 50% idea in the Bill was developed from this principle.

Clause 9 of the Bill, however, provides the surviving spouse with an option to buy out the share of the other beneficiaries. This is where the estate consists of only one house and the surviving spouse contributed to the acquisition of the house. Thus, the surviving spouse has the option to buy out the share of the children. What happens if the surviving spouse does not have the money to do so?

As if that is not enough pain, Section 4 of PNDCL 111further provides that where the deceased left behind more than one house, the spouse(s) and the children are to choose one house and hold it as co-owners. Where there is a disagreement (which almost always pertains) as to which house to choose, the administrator of the deceased’s property shall apply to the High Court for the court to determine which of those houses shall devolve to the surviving spouse(s) and children.

This is exactly Mrs. Thompson’s plight. She paid her two children’s school fees and catered for other needs at home whilst her dearest husband channelled his funds into building houses with the hope of renting them out to generate income for them until he met his untimely death. We can then say she contributed to the acquisition of the property if we are to apply Lord Denning’s principle here. So why is the Law now asking her to choose one of the numerous houses she supported her late husband in building and the worst of it all, to live with “strangers?” She decided to take the matrimonial home where she and her husband lived until his demise and now these twins born out of wedlock are saying they don’t want that house and that they want another. Now the court has to come in. I am sure you can feel her agony too.

Weaknesses in the Intestate Succession Bill

Clause 10 of the Intestate Succession Bill deals with joint ownership of property other than the matrimonial home. A surviving spouse acquires a fifty percent (50%) share in property jointly acquired with the deceased (as in Mrs. Thompson’s case), and an additional twenty-five (25%) share by virtue of being a spouse. Meaning that the rest of the 25% will go to the children and that would be better than what the Law stipulates. Here too there should be proof of joint acquisition.

Assuming that the widow and her children have finally decided on one house out of the lot and his household items have been shared equally amongst themselves, the Law provides in Section 5 that the residue of his properties shall be distributed in the following manner:

·      3/16 to the surviving spouse

·      9/16 to the surviving children

·      1/8 to the surviving parents and

·      1/8 in accordance with customary law

The biggest flaw here is how the rest of the properties can be distributed based on these fractions. Properties such as houses cannot be realistically divided into parts and distributed among these beneficiaries as suggested by the Law. Thus the houses left in the widow’s case cannot be easily distributed based on these fractions if all that the deceased left were houses and cars.

 Clause 12 of the Bill provides that dependant children of the deceased pursing education courses should have their needs met before the properties are shared. If the deceased left behind two children, a 30-year old PhD student and a 12-year old junior high school pupil, whose needs shall be met first if the available resources are limited? The Law unfortunately does not provide for this. And this can be a source of conflict if the children are of different mothers.

The Best Solution

By now you may be wondering what solution I want to give to the many flaws I have identified with the Law and the Bill. I have only one solution. Don’t die without a will. You don’t know when and how you will die so don’t wait to have grey hair before you start thinking about making a will. You may not have the luxury of calling your children to your death bed and telling them who should take what. Making a will does not mean you will die. Wills are not for only men to make. Women can also make wills. You can always amend your will. If all you have today is a single bedroom house, you can make a will. When you finally build a mansion, you can amend the will.

The troubles that come in the wake of dying intestate have ruined many families. Some have led to deaths. You are sure to have “RIP” inscribed on your tomb. We know it means “Rest in Peace.” But if you die without a will, your spouse and children may always visit your graveside and read it as, “Return if Possible.”

IN THE JOURNAL OF MRS. THOMPSON (5)

27/04/1988

Dear Diary,

I am not really happy today. To start with, Aba has finally moved in and she is doing very well but I am not comfortable with what happened this morning. I came back from the dawn prayer meeting at church only to find Aba laying our matrimonial bed. I asked her where Kwesi was and she told me he was in the bathroom. Kwesi usually wakes up late and he always lays the bed even before he steps out of the room so how come he asked Aba to lay the bed today?

I have not been able to ask him because I don't want to start any unnecessary argument. What if he was getting late for work and that was why he asked Aba to lay the bed? But come to think of it, he could have waited for me to come and do so, right? Or is it because I'm pregnant? Diary, I have been thinking about this all day. Don't tell me to ask Kwesi, because I can't. You know he gets angry easily sometimes and I wouldn't want to fight with my love over this little issue. I need my peace of mind.
Well, I warned Aba never to enter our room again. This room is for my husband and I and it is my duty to keep the place clean. Aba has no business in my matrimonial bedroom.

I hope you don't think I'm jealous. I know my Kwesi is a bad boy but he has promised never to cheat on me. And I can bet with my head that Kwesi would never hurt me by having an affair with my blood, my half sister. I admit that he likes women, well every man does but he will never chase after my sister, never! That will be an abomination!

Oh, yes! I nearly forgot to tell you about my rebarbative in-law. True to her words, Auntie Naomi reported Kwesi and I to their Abusuapanyin (family head), who also summoned us. Auntie Naomi is a horrendous liar. She went to tell their head that I asked Kwesi to throw her out of the house because the house is for me and I called her "a good-for-nothing old witch". Diary, I wept badly when their family head told me this. How can I call her a witch?And even though the house we are living in is mine, I have never ever reminded Kwesi of that. Let alone his mother! I leave everything to God. I wanted to talk to my mom about it but Kwesi insists that it stays between us. I am not going to visit my in-law and apologise. If she thinks she's a witch, so be it. I never told her that in her face and God knows.

Kwesi and I have decided to go for dinner this evening. I want Aba to come along. I want her to feel free and talk to us about anything that worries her. She has been through a lot. I have to prepare.

Talk to you soon.xxx

IN THE JOURNAL OF MRS. THOMPSON(4)

21/04/1988

Dear Diary,

I know I have abandoned you. I’m sorry for that. You have been my confidant and I feel sad that I didn’t do well by you. You are the only one to whom I can describe exactly how I feel. You are even closer to me than my husband Kwesi. I am sorry for not letting you in on what is happening in my world. I promise to confide in you more than ever from now onwards.

I am back from daddy’s funeral. I must say his burial was a sad one. Mummy couldn’t control her tears. You should have seen Auntie Aya, daddy’s younger sister. She wouldn’t even allow the pallbearers to put daddy’s coffin in the car when he was being taken to the cemetery. But diary, the world is funny o. This woman who was weeping as if her world had come to a halt was the same person who drank and danced during the thanksgiving service till she couldn’t move anymore. Uncle Tony later found her sleeping on the septic tank behind the house. Hmm, this woman can drink!

Anyways, I believe you know I’m pregnant now and I can’t wait to be a mother soon. Kwesi and I have decided to call our baby Michella if she’s a girl or Micheal, if a boy. I have a strong feeling that I’ll give birth to a girl but Kwesi insists that we’re having a boy. Well, we’ll know the gender of the baby soon. But truth be told, I feel tired and sick. I now can’t stand Kwesi’s favourite perfume. I eat like a refugee and sleep like a log. I’m not happy, diary. I feel I’m bloating. My nose is growing bigger as the days go by and as for my feet, I cannot describe. I felt really sad when Kwesi told me last week that I remind him of a glutton in his hometown anytime I eat. It was meant to be a joke but I didn’t take it lightly at all. My Kwesi jokes a lot but I felt this one was a direct attack. Well, that is about the hormonal changes I’m going through now. I’m sure I will be fine. It’s only for a time.

Lest I forget! Kwesi has finally decided to let my half sister live with us. Aba is a very nice lady and even though her mother doesn’t get on well with us, she manages to relate with all of daddy’s children. I think I like her. She will be helpful in the house too especially now that I’m expecting a baby. I can now sleep in peace and not think of waking up at 5:00am to wash Kwesi’s heavy jeans. I intend talking to her before she finally moves in. She has to know her”do’s and don’ts” in this house and what I expect of her.  I have decided to pay her school fees and Kwesi has also decided to help. God bless my husband, he is such a sweet man.

 About my “dearest” in-law. She struck again o, my dear diary. Hmm, but this time she wasn’t lucky. I came home last Tuesday from work only to meet this old woman at my gate with a suitcase. I asked her what was in the bag and this woman had the guts to tell me that she had a dream that I wasn’t feeding her son well so she was coming to stay with us and cook for him. Diary, I think my in-law is suffering from some sickness I cannot describe. Well, I opened the door for her to enter and without asking where she can put her stuff, this old woman immediately opened the guest room and entered. I served her rice and stew which she greedily ate and shamelessly asked for more after complaining that there was too much pepper in the stew. I didn’t utter a word. I was waiting patiently for my Kwesi to come. Finally, at 7:45pm, my baby dropped home! You should have seen how the drama unfolded in this house. Hahaha. Kwesi kicked his mother out of the house and threatened to call the police if she ever stepped in this house uninvited. I thought that was harsh but deep inside me I felt she had been best served what she deserved. She said she’ll will report  Kwesi to their 'abusuapanyin'. Let’s see how that goes.

I think Kwesi is in now, I can hear the sound of the horn of his car. Let me hide you before he finds out about us. Love always, and know I’m back for good.  Friends forever.xxx

The Trauma in Making Decisions

I never knew growing up was such a stretchy, demanding and a rough journey. There was a time in my life when I couldn't wait to be on my own and live the life I ever wanted.  A time came when i wished I were a successful young lady who spent vacations on islands and all but if I was told about the hurdles of growing up, I think I would have relaxed and wouldn't have lifted my hopes that high.

Now there are decisions to make and I'm scared to make mistakes. In fact, i don't ever want to have to write about my deepest regret one day.  I keep praying to God about choices to make because chale it looks like  there are many avenues and I don't know which way to go.

I bet I'm not the only one going through this,sometimes we feel like there should be that one person who should  tell us where to go and what to do and success can be assured. Really, I'm tired of pretending like I know what to do every time, I'm tired of acting like I know where to go  and how to get there. I get so frustrated and depressed sometimes  especially when it comes to making the right choices in life. In fact, I wish God would come from above and hold my hand and  send me to places I need to be and show me what I  need to do. Yes, that is my wish! But for now I need to hear Him and follow His path but......

In times like this I rest upon God's promises especially  His promise to give me a hope and a future. It's a bit scary to think of the future sometimes but I know because He lives i can face tomorrow.

I don't know what decision you have to make at this moment but I'll tell you something; follow your heart because you can never go wrong when God is there. Yes,, pressures may come from every side but  don't you ever worry because you know who you have in your heart and He can never go wrong! 

I made a promise this year to cling to the "old rugged cross" and to fix my eyes on Jesus.We may be scared to make the wrong decisions but let us always remember that with Jesus in our hearts and our eyes fixed on Hiim, He will direct us and help us live the fulfilled life He brought us here to enjoy.

No more depression, non more sadness, no more anxiety in decision making when we cling on to that man of Calvary! -Ezaneaya

When Being Strong Is Your Only Option

I told my colleague today that I'll smile whilst I have teeth and she was like,"yh, that's so true, a good point there!" I spoke with a friend and she wondered why I sound  cheerful on phone lately and I responded simply;" that is my only option". 

There are times when people see you in a very gleeful state and wonder what could be the secret but they have no idea the down moments you've had. The days when you cry all night and wish you weren't going through your current situations. There have been times I wept all night and my eyes were swollen by the next morning and had to lie that I had an allergy, times when I never felt like seeing anyone but rather be alone and cry my lungs out.

Many people would be wondering why I'm writing this but my status about women today is simple: a strong woman is the one who cries at night but wakes up in the morning and tells herself that God is in control! Yes, God is fighting all her battles and victory is hers. Life is a rollercoaster but when God is with her, He carries her when He knows she can't go through the pain anymore. 

My fellow women, I think we should always celebrate and walk with our shoulders high because God is mightily with us, His Holy Spirit is within us and His angels walk with us. Yes, we may weep and wonder why we're going through that situation but we are rest assured that Jesus got our backs! :)

God loves us and He would never never ever leave us. After all, He's not a man that He'd lie.

Love you ladies