RE: AFTER THOUGHT LEADERSHIP OF KODUA MUST GIVE WAY: WHEN CORRECTIONS BECOME THE CULTURE OF A SECRETARIAT

The article titled “Afterthought Leadership of Kodua Must Give Way: When corrections become the culture of a Secretariat” appears more emotionally driven than objectively analytical. While criticism in political organizations is healthy and necessary, reducing every challenge within a party secretariat to the failure of one individual is both simplistic and misleading.

First, political parties, especially large institutions like the New Patriotic Party, operate through collective leadership structures, not through the unilateral decisions of one General Secretary. Attempting to personalize every administrative correction, communication gap, or strategic adjustment as evidence of incompetence ignores the realities of modern political administration, if you care to know,it was the decision of National Executive Committee and National Council that the full list shouldn't be published for strategic reasons but rather the Co-Chairpersons, Secretaries and Spokespersons be published, it's not afterthought.

Secondly, the article fails to acknowledge the difficult political environment within which the current leadership has operated. Every opposition party after electoral defeat naturally goes through moments of internal restructuring, disagreements, and strategic recalibration. These occurrences are not unique to the current administration of the party and cannot honestly be used as sole indicators of failed leadership.

More importantly, leadership should not be judged merely by isolated incidents amplified through partisan commentary. A fair assessment must consider organizational stability, grassroots mobilization, internal reforms, and the ability to maintain party cohesion during difficult periods. Despite criticisms, the current leadership has continued to keep the party functional, active, and nationally relevant.

The repeated use of emotionally charged language in the article also weakens its credibility. Constructive criticism should offer balanced analysis and practical alternatives rather than creating the impression of a coordinated agenda against individuals. Internal party discourse must strengthen democratic culture, not deepen unnecessary divisions ahead of critical national political engagements.

Furthermore, history has shown that constant public attacks on party leadership often serve the interests of political opponents more than the party itself. Internal concerns are best addressed through established party structures and dialogue rather than sensational public commentary designed to provoke outrage.

Ultimately, no leadership is beyond criticism, but criticism must be fair, factual, and solution-oriented. Personalizing institutional challenges and calling for resignations without balanced evidence risks undermining unity and distracting attention from the broader objective of rebuilding and repositioning the party for the future.The original article was published on GhanaWeb.

Kwabena Frimpong

Deputy Protocol Director, NPP