In Ghana’s fiercely competitive political environment, the sole ideology that appears to persist is one of expediency.
Regardless of whether it’s the National Democratic Congress (NDC) or the New Patriotic Party (NPP), the trend has grown distressingly common: switch roles, and previously denounced actions quickly turn into accepted practices—or the reverse occurs.
The constant shifting in political positions has severely undermined public confidence in democratic institutions.
Ghanaians, known for their sharp insight, now anticipate that when a political party transitions from the opposition benches to the halls of governance, it often discards its former principles in favor of the benefits enjoyed by those in power. This shift leads to an ongoing decline in trustworthiness—resulting in a profoundly skeptical public.
The Judiciary: Held in High Esteem or Mocked Depending on Those in Power
Consider the judiciary as an example. Whenever a political party finds itself in opposition, it protests loudly when Supreme Court justices are nominated by a current president, alleging that the executive branch is trying to manipulate judicial decisions from the bench.
However, once in power, they move swiftly to fill judicial vacancies with such zeal that it indicates their previous apprehension was due to not having the opportunity to exert control over it yet.
For instance, President Akufo-Addo’s government has appointed more Supreme Court justices than any other presidency during the Fourth Republic.
Predictably, the NDC sounded alarm bells. However, during former President Mahama’s tenure, analogous objections were voiced by the opposition party NPP at the time, accusing the judiciary of becoming politicized. This situation seems to suggest that notions of fairness and judicial autonomy become significant solely when one does not hold power.
On May 1, 2025, this jaded political spectacle escalated further as NPP Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin criticized President Mahama for nominating seven appellate court judges to the Supreme Court.
At a press conference, he criticized this action as “a strategic and intentional attempt to fill the Supreme Court with supporters,” describing it as an opaque method for achieving a “third term.” He further stated, “Strengthening the legal system isn’t done this way; instead, such moves allow a government to consolidate control surreptitiously.”
The irony here cannot be overlooked. The very party that championed an unprecedented number of judicial appointees not long ago is now protesting with nearly the same rhetoric and reasoning. This is like a recurring theatrical performance with changing actors—an all-too-familiar story for Ghanaians.
The Media: Ally of the Opposition, Adversary of the Government
Ghana’s media, which was previously considered one of the most open in Africa, now frequently finds itself oscillating between being celebrated and persecuted. Whether in opposition, both the NDC and NPP parties portray the media as guardians of democracy. They conduct interviews, write opinion pieces, and hold press conferences to condemn injustices.
However, after taking office, the atmosphere shifts entirely. Critics from the media who challenge governmental policies are labeled as adversaries of advancement. Those investigative journalists face harassment, while opposing viewpoints get overshadowed by a system designed for spreading propaganda and applying discreet pressure tactics. Consequently, what used to represent journalistic independence starts being seen by those in power not just as independent but rather as an uncontrolled entity requiring control.
As an experienced reporter commented lately, “It seems like freedom of the press is only acknowledged when it supports the aspirations of the opposition.”
Protests: Heroic when out of power, condemned when in power.
The most striking reversal happens concerning public demonstrations. While in opposition, both parties organized protests citing issues like financial struggles, bribery, or voting irregularities. They passionately defend constitutional liberties and the importance of civil discourse.
However, once in power, these same political entities use law enforcement to suppress protests, frequently employing excessive force. Their stories shift rapidly—the demonstrators transform into “troublemakers,” civic organizations get labeled as “politically driven,” and appeals for moderation give way to cries for “law and order.”
These reversals are not only deceptive but also highly damaging to democracy.
Is It a Deteriorating Democracy—or One in Limbo?
The underlying problem is that these clear-cut double standards have been normalized. In an ideal democracy, political parties act as custodians of principles. However, in our system, they frequently appear more like players in a never-ending farce—switching roles and altering their lines based on whether they’re on the winning or losing end of the power dynamic.
The outcomes are not theoretical; they are experienced through increasing disinterest among younger electors, the belief that “all politicians are alike,” and the deep-seated disenchantment felt by individuals who previously hoped for potential transformation.
Ghana should aspire for more. Building a true democracy isn’t just about alternating control of power; it’s also about adhering steadfastly to principles whether one is part of the ruling party or an opponent. Only when our politicians adopt consistent values regardless of their position can we hope for meaningful advancement rather than repetitive cycles, ensuring that our democratic facade transforms into substance.
The Final Word
Ultimately, governance encompasses more than just catchy phrases and short speeches; it revolves around trustworthiness and moral integrity. Therefore, we should continually question: were the circumstances reversed tomorrow, would the approach be altered once more?
Should history be considered reliable, we already possess the answer.
###
Provided by Syndigate Media Inc. (
Syndigate.info
).
Leave a Reply