Alan Kyerematen withdraws from NPP presidential primaries

By now all of you have heard of Alan Kyerematen from the NPP presidential primary scheduled for November 4, 2023. He cited his reasons, so they will not be repeated here, and we should respect him for the honors.

Nevertheless, almost every member of NPP, whichever candidate you support knows that our party is fundamentally weakened for some time now, even before the superdelegates confab. The reasons that led to the high-profile resignation of Hon. Alan Kyerematen are an indication that the party is at a breaking point.

From a micro perspective, the party as an organization is weak, its decision-making capacity is uninspiring, the NPP brand has been tainted with scandals and alleged corrupt dealings, our behavior while in power has been bereft of innovation, poor insightful understanding of the challenges facing the country, and many more. In summary, the famous, strong NPP brand that we know has no reputable standing in the electorate.

In the “Federalist Papers,” James Madison wrote in number 10 about the inevitability and dangers of factions in political parties. He lamented the excesses, and unhealthy nature of factions as it breed distrust, disunity, hatred, and violence which could lead to decline and eventual demise of parties. However, he said that with patience, tolerance of ideas, and focus on party goals, factions could be tamed. NPP’s organizational life cycle is at a precipitous cliff edge, a little tap could tilt its balance of survival. A common phrase in management studies is that “organizations implode mostly from internal factors, but they do not explode from external factors only.”

From a macro perspective, the institutional foundations in the country within which the party operates have been rendered ineffective by our party. Ghanaians have little trust in our court system for obvious reasons, from alleged accusations of the Chief Justice taking bribes, judges allegedly getting paid to fix cases, etc.

Parliament, the legislative body that should serve as the bastion of our democracy has been ineffective in its oversight of all other branches of government and has been ineffective in rolling out innovative policy choices to deal with the intractable challenges facing the country with prudent legislative fixes. As a result, the courts and the executive have gotten away with numerous, obvious “excesses.”

The Electoral Commission (EC), charged with superintending our elections, has been flip-flopping with policy decisions. The criteria for voting by Ghanaians seem to change during elections, registration exercises are normally marred by indecision, and poor coherence and coordination with natural, collaborative organizations such as civil society and other groups such as the TUC, etc.

On public safety, the Police are reportedly doing better these days, at least compared to recent times.

The Executive, I dare say has lost the bottom of governance it was given seven years ago. A weakened country, alleged corruption, poor policy innovation, unsound decision-making, lack of clarity on actions, ineffective leadership, and others, characterize the executive.

To bring it back home, let’s place the recent superdelegates elections in context by looking at the fusion of the micro and macro factors that led to the outcomes and ramifications we are debating now.

Successful past primaries that were described as transparent, free, and fair were done at a single venue. In 2007 when seventeen candidates ran, the several thousand delegates converged at the Great Hall of the University of Ghana, Legon. In the end, Nana Akuffo-Addo emerged as the winner. Egos were bruised so were dashed hopes. In the end, tempers cooked and the party healed from within.

The first question is why this time around with less than one thousand d delegates, the Party chose to decentralize the voting to the regions. It would have been cost-effective, transparent, free, and fair had the party centralized the voting process. The suboptimal outcomes we’re discussing would have been avoided.

The second question is was the Electoral Commission in charge of the electoral process? From all indications, the EC abdicated and ceded that role to the Party. So, the received outcomes were expected.

Third, who was in charge of ensuring the overall security of the voting exercise? The police in my opinion failed to rein in voter intimidation, violence, and protection of the vote and polling stations.

Whether we like it or not, these are the actions we need to investigate and condemn rather than casting insinuations and innuendos around. The candidates did what was expected, it’s the institutions mandated to ensure transparency, and free and fair elections, that failed. NPP, our party, its leadership, and the government owe NPP members, presidential aspirants, and Ghanaians an explanation for what happened. Most importantly, it’s the government that controls these institutions that should do more of the explaining.