An ethical reflection on Prof Ahmed Jinapor Abdulai’s promotion issues

As one interested in the quality and standards that sustain the integrity of our higher institutions, I have observed the recent discussions regarding the promotion of Prof Ahmed Jinapor Abdulai with a mixture of apprehension and reflections.

My aim is not to participate in the collective criticism nor to impugn any particular individual. Instead, it involves taking a step back to examine what this moment discloses regarding the larger academic framework upon which we all rely.

Ghana's tertiary sector has diligently endeavoured to establish a reputation comparable to international standards. This necessitates that academic titles, ranks, and promotions possess consistent meaning regardless of the individual who bears them. When promotions are conducted in accordance with well-defined, transparent timelines and academic records are indisputably accurate, the overall integrity of the system is significantly enhanced.

Students develop confidence, academicians are inspired to maintain the highest standards, and institutions establish credibility both locally and internationally.

That is exactly why the recent questions some lecturers have raised about Prof Ahmed Jinapor’s promotion cannot just get swept under the rug. The sequence of promotions in this specific instance—advancing from appointment to senior lecturer within a brief period, followed by progression from senior lecturer to associate professor and subsequently to full professor—inevitably raises concerns.

Most universities do have ways for truly exceptional scholars to get "out-of-turn" or accelerated promotions. These pathways exist because sometimes some faculty outputs are truly exceptional. But these kinds of cases are very rare, so the evidence that supports them must be even clearer, more open, and leave no room for doubt. This is not to say that it is not possible, but to stress how important it is to be clear when these kinds of paths are used.

This distinction matters because in most academic traditions, promotion is not only about publications. It is also about professional maturity, teaching experience, mentorship, service, and one’s broader contribution to the scholarly community. These elements take time to demonstrate, and time is an important part of how academic credibility is built—the wheel of academics grinds slowly.

This differentiation is significant as, in most academic traditions, advancement encompasses more than merely publications. It pertains to professional maturity, pedagogical experience, mentorship, service, and one's extensive contributions to the academic community. These aspects require time to manifest, and time is a crucial component in the establishment of academic credibility—the wheel of academics turns slowly.

Presenting these arguments is not an indictment; it is an appeal to safeguard the system that has cultivated generations of intellectuals. Should the public see that some promotions occur at an accelerated pace or lack sufficient justification, it jeopardises the integrity of trust in academic credentials. This is an expense the nation cannot sustain.

Therefore, I am convinced that the most appropriate course of action is one grounded in transparency rather than defensiveness. A transparent and impartial evaluation of the promotion process—not directed at any specific individual but intended to enhance the integrity of the system—would contribute to restoring public trust. It would also set a strong example that everyone, even those in charge or in charge of rules, should be held to the same standards. This matter does not pertain to disciplinary action. It pertains to providing reassurance.

I see this conversation as a good time to go over and make sure everyone understands the rules for promotions across all our higher institutions, both private and public. Useful questions to spice up the conversation could include: How long should promotion take between ranks?

What does "sufficient scholarly maturity" mean? What can we do to stop real or imagined conflicts of interest? And most importantly, how should we manage quick or "out-of-turn" promotions for outstanding academics to make sure they are fair, consistent, and properly documented?

I hope that this conversation brings the academic community together instead of tearing it apart. As academias, we owe it to ourselves, our students, and our country to support processes, regulations, and practices that make people feel good.

In articulating this reflection, I do not position myself as an accuser but rather as an individual who holds a profound belief in the importance of a robust, credible, and transparent academic system. Our higher education institutions have produced leaders and bright minds who have changed the world. We should all take seriously our duty to protect their image.