A Comparative Study of Athenian and Ghanaian Institutions of Accountability

ABSTRACT The ability of citizens to scrutinise officials is a long-standing power, and central to the strength o f democracy. Consequently, it is o f critical importance to the well being of any society, and the individuals who are a part of it, that their government, and the people who manage it, are held highly accountable for their actions or, in some cases, their failure to act, since this helps to minimise human deprivation and corruption. For ancient Athenians, making officials accountable through strengthened institutions o f public accountability — such as the Heliaia (the populr tribunal or the supreme court o f the land), the dokimasia(an investigative body constituted either by the boule or in the heliaia, to test whether a man was formally qualified to hold an office), the euthyna (the body that examined the accounts of every public official),the boule (the popular council or the council o f citizens appointed to run daily affairs o f the city) and the ecclesia (the principal assembly o f the Athenian democracy) — was the key to lent. This thesis concentrates on the systems and procedures two institution^ ^^accountability in the oldest established democratic government in the world (A th en s),% ^d o y flia 1a§;and the euthyna, and attempts to establish a correlation between the two institutions of accountability aforementioned with two institutions of accountability for public officials (the appointments committee of parliament and the audit service) in one of the first country to achieve independence in sub-Saharan Africa (Ghana)