A Critical Assessment of President Mahama’s First 120 Days in Office
Former Member of Parliament Ebenezer Nii Narh Nartey has delivered a scathing assessment of President John Dramani Mahama’s performance during his initial 120 days in office, awarding him a meager 1.2% rating. Nartey argues that the President’s touted accomplishments are largely superficial and fall far short of expectations. A key point of contention revolves around the President’s claim of forming a lean government, a claim that Nartey dismisses as misleading.
Nartey’s primary critique centers on the President’s inclusion of ministerial appointments as a significant achievement. He contends that simply nominating individuals for ministerial positions is a fundamental duty of any president, not a noteworthy accomplishment in itself. Furthermore, Nartey points out that the President initially promised to appoint 60 ministers but has thus far nominated only 56, further undermining the claim of a streamlined government. He questions whether the President’s definition of "lean" applies solely to the executive branch or the entire government apparatus, highlighting the alleged appointment of numerous presidential staffers in each region.
Nartey’s accusations extend to the appointment of NDC regional organizers as presidential staffers, positions he claims carry salaries equivalent to those of deputy ministers. This practice, he argues, directly contradicts the President’s assertion of a lean government and suggests a prioritization of political patronage over fiscal responsibility. He questions the justification for such appointments and their contribution to effective governance, implying that they serve primarily to reward party loyalists rather than address pressing national needs.
The discrepancy between the promised number of ministerial appointments and the actual number further fuels Nartey’s skepticism. He views this as evidence of a lack of planning and a potential disconnect between the President’s pronouncements and his actions. This, he argues, undermines the credibility of the President’s claims and raises concerns about the overall effectiveness of his administration.
Nartey’s assessment underscores a deeper concern about the transparency and accountability of the government. He questions the rationale behind the appointments and the criteria used to select individuals for these roles. The lack of clarity surrounding these appointments, coupled with the allegations of inflated salaries, creates an environment of suspicion and distrust, further eroding public confidence in the government.
In conclusion, Nartey’s critique paints a picture of an administration prioritizing political expediency over genuine progress. He challenges the President to provide a more substantive account of his achievements and to address the concerns raised regarding the size and composition of his government. The former MP’s harsh assessment underscores the importance of holding elected officials accountable and demanding transparency in governance, particularly during the crucial early days of an administration. He calls for a more rigorous evaluation of the government’s performance, moving beyond superficial pronouncements and focusing on tangible outcomes that benefit the citizenry.
