File photo
Preamble
While Ghana's democracy is celebrated and it is actually done in the realms of changing over governments in multiparty democratic elections, but still entrenching in comparison globally as a newbie. The scientific type of Ghana's election is the first-past-the-post, which candidates winning based on most votes received especially the legislature and another is the 50% eligible votes cast plus 1 voter voted for majority to emerge as winner.
The latter is to receive half and plus one voter voted ballot cast of the total eligible voted and counted, in this case, reference to the presidential election. What makes news has always been characteristics of developing economies, which central effects emanating from survival of the citizenry, however gradually resonance in some freedom of speech increasing attitude within democracy and party politics yet a certain strong linkage between this survival in economic terms and other related ones of highly desired expectations and the rights in speaking, involvement, participation engagement in dissonance anyway. The game and practice of political elections to regulate, conduct to produce democracy have rules and laws governing the process and event and thereafter, which standardizations are situated within the conduct and engaged in acceptability by all stakeholders involved.
Naturally, competitions arose emotional and psychological realism when winners and losers are determined, meanwhile, that is not what is at stake, so the ultimate is also best outcome with the help of officiating officials as part of that stakeholders obligations to handle the art of elections encompassed trajectories. Year 2020 elections in Ghana recorded improvement on major areas that saw and witnessed citizens queued, voted and listened to declared winners and those that did not win as per the independent mandate of the electoral commission with other stakeholders. Whether these exercises were truly and fully accepted by all those that voted and others will be fallacy of overgeneralisation within emerging democracy; but how and what really beyond surmounted are what defining the gravity and sensitive nature of final results and allegations. Not the purported findings of reported malfeasance per se will the officiating officials and other associated bodies may look at and perhaps consider necessary to resolving but what actually the methods used in the process and event to arrive at what can be consumed as counter and deviation from the declared. So, this makes direct beneficiaries like the political parties contested owners of election inputs and outputs of the process and event, which eventually enabling outcomes received without significant challenge. Now, what makes the challenge in the first place may not be only suspicion, could not be that other institutions selecting or attempting, instead of the one vote one person's cast for choice, doubt the professionals conducting, ill-prepared and lack of appropriate resources to own results and many others ( factual & suspicion) are characteristics of losing candidates and teams overtime embedded in elections.
So alien to the process syndrome. The elections were planned, conducted and results declared and winners pronounced by the mandated body. This document looked at the election history and elections of the 4th republic in retrospective and factored in the once opaque ballot boxes with some instances no boxes, no picture identity card to vote, then to picture and of course, biometric actuality. Of which conduction in the jurisdiction of interim officials to independent body. The system has come a long way, and corrections and recommendations fused into; tested resilience at the highest court of adjudication ( supreme court ) and all groomed the culture and socialisation of the fledgling activity. It breaks the issues into four thematic viewpoints and as naked as every voter voted and others would comprehend and appreciate even with spin intellectuals beliefs and ideologies that will seek to navigate to diverting sense. Some discourse in my " dialectic entrenching democracy versus economy preamble "; second part within same central worldview reminiscent.
1. Direct beneficiaries of election - political parties and parties selected leaders contested ... .
2. Stakeholders to the election, which included permanent and temporary mandated to do.
3. Voters and their attitudes toward their parties, others- and elections and understanding of inputs and consequential outcomes.
4. Last but not least situates on resources in general and navigate within strategies and ways and means of elections.
Brief Elections Facts
In 1992, that brought 4th republic, late president Rawlings won the presidential election with 58.4% and again won with 57.4% in 1996. Former President Kufuor received 56.90% in 2000 and won again with 52.45% in 2004. Late former president Mills won 50.25% in 2008 but did not live for his second term; while former president Mahama won 2012 election with 50.70%.
Presently the incumbent president Nana Addo has been declared winner for 2020 election with 51.30% but previously won the 2016 election with 52.72% (Wikipedia) . All mentioned but forming the 4th republic. Actually, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah as president from 1957 to 1966 first republic, Prof. Kofi Busia as president from 1969-1972 and 2nd repubiic; while Dr. Hilla Limann also ruled in 3rd republic from 1979 to 1981.
In the words of Haugaard ( 2010) " democracy is a fragile flower that presupposes specific forms of power and perception of authority " When gravitated this perception toward advertent or otherwise selective perception, then democracy becomes false hope. Generally speaking, the culture and socialisation in the election process evolved with certain nuanced fine-tuning nomenclatures and ways of acceptance.
Therefore, it really makes news in this culture when deviated to factors characterising entrenching election process and events toward democracy on one hand, and do not actually make news when adherent to those factors on another hand in comparison. So for example, in the conduct of elections toward sovereignty's democracy in Ghana- fraud, theft, stolen etc. should not make any new news , unlike in advanced country . Let us say US, and such attributes like fraud, theft, stolen etc. become indelible and attract news with international lenses everywhere watching and expecting the right thing to be done. Many countries in the world gravitated toward democratic ruling by the direct and indirect pressure and support from US, by the way.
Perhaps innovative technological ways for one vote cast and your vote counted immediately is appropriate. Just like I suggested to Harvard business school as commentary the use of mobile phone technology voting. Schaefer (1995) says " Statuses and social roles are in perpetual flux as the overall social structure of the society continues to change".
After all, the gap in democracy among advanced and developing is a master and apprentice situation, though in reality the situations might not be an appropriate pair to compare. Democracy made around all institutions in some situations and seemingly multiparty elections change over warming up toward another situation. Like a great Shakespearean play, the world political drama compels our attention and engages our intellects and emotions. But one fact remains unchanged that every election conducted is risky, however, your target is not the surmountable risk. When and how to handle the trajectories of emotional and psychological realism versus the actuality would tell the maturity of the stakeholder's inter and interactions with vital institutions of governance.
"As these interactions have grown, so has the need for regularized behavior and rules to prescribe that behavior " ( Rourke 1995, 299 ). As I researched overtime now and have come to establish the fact that political parties also win elections with several factors interplayed, but constant of all in modern times politics is the nitch strategies and competitive advantage that approached as a business enterprise through all the thematic areas.
This sense can be clearly seen in part 2 of ( dialectic entrenching democracy versus economy preamble ) work also showcased two major political parties struggled for power in multiparty democracy - having their generic supporters and those cajoled materials lured displayed etc.
Direct Beneficiaries
Firstly, the direct beneficiaries, and in this case comprises but not limited to the presidential candidates and their vice-presidential candidates; together also with their parties legislatures and when power is won to rule with supporting staff ( e.g ministers, chief executives etc.). The winning team comes in office and leaves with them, but there are others also that work with presidents and parties though unseen virtually and they are powerful, resourceful and conduct their activities and relationships as typically as business. The security apparatuses, most times fall in the category that comes in and stays in governance after change of government.
What will be the interest of these beneficiaries to winning election has transformed from perhaps social groups, game of chance etc. to a very profitable venture that among fame and reputation gains, they also reduced poverty within close party supports, government functionaries and enriched resumes, wealth creation, connections among others at the top echelons in stages anyway. Though survival as a major reason for winning once upon a time was the main cause for winning, gradually the voter's attitudes won't remain same and technology among other enlightenments enforced willingly freedom of speaking attitude, involvement and participation. Nothing at all, but the voters rush to register attitude, queued to vote attitude and protest and or jubilate within limited self-regulation and minimal restrictions.
The most powerful persons may not have been the presidential candidates and vice candidates, also by extension not the parliamentary candidates in this respect but those that approach the political activities as purely business; and many a time grounded by other private and individuals state security interest as purely personal. Their main aim is to maximize profits and gains regardless of rules and laws unlike professional politicians who interface constituents and media and accountable to the state machinery.
So elections have gone business, hence planned strategies and appropriate resources are not just the way out to win , actually committed persons that can resist material cajoled and enticements -an integrated approach to winning. This presupposes that the parties agents whose work I consider vital and cardinal to successful elections and parties winning or losing would not be business though, however can be affected to affect outcomes when traded responsibilities and exchanged with other gains.
Not fallouts per se but traded their roles and compromised to the well-paid source seductive. Blame them not much because the election practice is business and money is central, especially to materialistic political party agents. Winning teams approach and value to these political agents, perhaps go beyond the old adage of vigilantism to which included differentiation to competitive advantage, maximize protection, reduce conflict etc.
surely above all rather is assuring true reflection of outcomes. All your effort can come to nill when you do not put value on these PPA and vice versa effect. They are vital in the election process and cardinal for quality outcomes.
Elections Stakeholders
Obviously, every election will be conducted by officials and in Ghana fourth republic from interim national electoral commission ( INEC ) to national electoral commission ( NEC ); and headed by Dr. Afari-Gyan, to Charlotte Osei and now Jean Adukwei Mensa. Elections were conducted by interim election body before independent electoral commission, which performance has always been credible considering the fragile fledgling nature, yet this 2020 presidential and parliamentary elections conducted and reflected a great deal. Officiating stakeholders and others ( monitoring, security, media ...) plus their performance in this general election but seeing through the lenses of losing parties and aggrieved and you will have the story told differently. Nevertheless, elections will always be conducted by these stakeholders and winners will jubilate, while losers find reasons for their lost.
The Interim national electoral commission's INEC mandate headed by Mr. Justice Ofori-Boateng supported by deputies Nana Oduro Numapau and Dr. Afari-Gyan. Again, Dr. K..Afari-Gyan was appointed by former late president Rawlings and he headed the national electoral commission NEC yet his party lost elections under his stewardship. Madam Charlotte Osei appointed by former president John Manama and he lost woefully in the 2016 election, and then madam Jean Adukwei Mensa appointed by present incumbent president and he won the 2020 election according to the electoral commission's declaration. It does not matter who appointed EC chairperson because it does not guarantee winning.
The EC body has been tested and its performance for conducting and declaring elections have regularly appreciated, but what may underscore is the fullest capacities of parties agents be built and be very intrinsic part to conduct of elections, so to be on the same page with EC officials. Some political party agents' nonperformance degenerate alleged real and bogus elections fraud over the years that cast doubt on EC credibility, which contention always lost to the independence of EC ( credibility lost in truism and maintained credibility when false ).
Furthermore, Stoke & Tornquist (2013) situate as " It is increasingly accepted that those with power tend to dominate and manipulate democratic institutions, while those who are marginalized have insufficient power to use the rules and regulations " . The processes and events in elections are a shared responsibility. Despite protestations and challenging results the system equally always has a way to regulate quietude.
Voters
Actually, the voters who voted would make you a winner, and in this situation, humans behavior and attitudes are not static, so do their approaches to vote for those they do. However the parties do have their strongholds and swing and undecided areas though, that would not deter the fluctuations of some. Voters' attitudes during 1992 elections did not seem to be same in subsequent elections, of course, certain factors inducement may not have changed, and may not have equally behaved like previously voted. What makes them alter attitudes could also be as assertiveness, while lessons learned from previous elections contribute and yet personal and communal gains and taste, elites and other significant other effects, disappointment etc.
But voters do shift voting pattern, and when a certain cohort having most voters shifting and then the winner is produced. Contextually, a party's strength to winning also rests on resources or efficiency dimension according to Konig (2007) . Quite surprisingly, the cohort that are materialistic do influence with it small percentage that makes the winner but consequential that influence as big with that % outcome. Their voting behavior are also greatly affected by timely strategies and cajoled resources. Reference in dialectic entrenching democracy versus economy preamble, (2019).
Resources And Strategies - Election As Business Enterprise
Interestingly, resources and appropriate strategies in contemporary times win elections. When you do have two dominant political parties with almost the same strength, what actually makes the differences are the not human factors which include targeted resources ( cash & others ) and of course, nitch strategies. You know where to apply much money and when to rely on goodwill etc. In addition to this fact is when competitive advantage produces that edged to make the difference. Though human beings are resources in the business of politics and the present vice president in the days of vice presidential candidate and the presently vice presidential candidate of the biggest opposition party are such examples.
Their impact told their value however that is not what was focused on, rather how did they use the materials, resources and of course strategies to garner those votes ( the numbers speak for themselves ). Similarly Konig (2007) asserts that " ... a party can be challenged depends on the larger competitive situation, which is characterized by five kinds of influences: potential new competitors, existence of substitutes, voters influence, ideation suppliers and intensity of rivalry.
"While resources could also mean projects, programs, activities etc . at places that will be seen as flagship alone yet a source of cajoling effects cascading potential political benefits. Another is the recruitment drive, technology usage, etc. that facilitate winning and satisfaction with losing.
Hence people do not only wait for politicians to come along with survival needs, they proactively reached out, they speak out, suggesting involvement and participation, which inextricably guaranteed their needs. Normally, since the start of fourth republic dispensation, incumbents governments votes and percentages reduced in their second terms. See reference above. In 2016, the New Patriotic Party received 53.72% in 1st term and got 51.30% in 2020, lost about 2% (Wikipedia) .
Yes, they won as per the EC declaration, perhaps they were saved by some advertent and otherwise nitch strategies and resources e.g their flagship and other projects/programs targeted the about 50% of eligible voters of aged cohorts of 18-35 that also voted, so political advantage. Though oppositions have their own fluctuations too, in 2016 National Democratic Congress received about 44.5% and got 47.36% in 2020, which also means appreciated about 2% over previous (EC);. Their present vice presidential candidate could have also accounted for the appreciation among others. Even though there was some " skirt and blouse " in some parts of the country, what about the many attributes and linkages e.g the death of former president and vice emotional factors... No founder at the conner and the doom continued.
No presidents appreciated votes on their second terms in office despite the resources used, funds spent, goodwill acquired, developments showcasing as evidence of performance and others. When will the jinx of reduced percentage as of reduced voted for in second terms be broken, these trajectories will redefine the what and how real performance, appreciation and continuity in accountable democracy regularising elections winners.
Conclusion
Ultimately, there is no doubt that the two biggest political parties presidential candidates in the 2020 presidential elections demonstrated maturity, quality, experience but strict notions and actions throughout the process to declaration. And that they are assets to their parties and country's political democracy.
Of course, newbie democracy, entrenching election would surely encounter aggrieved losing party protestations. The protest when attended to, though some may be flavorous and others factual within human institutions would prevent next occurrence, and actual emotional matters dealt with in context of the art of election. Fundamentally, the EC was to conduct elections and declare winners and they did just that and accomplished, however, fallouts have their places of adjudication but the independence of it should not be limited.
Statistics and data do not win elections, what guarantees your winning and honorable losing is 1 ballot vote cast and counted and collated to declare actuality. Democratic elections have come to stay, the rules and regulations toward it conduct must be sanctified and enforced, so when it is conducted as a business enterprise, then you would discus profit and loss, you would explain poverty reduction and wealth creation. Meanwhile, the linkage between survival as consequence for winning and now reinforced freedom to be assertive speaking, involving in this aged of technological advancement could not be overemphasized as the general rationale.
