The Managing Editor of The Custodian newspaper, Awudu Mahama, has launched a scathing critique of President John Mahama’s administration, accusing it of betraying the promise of a national “reset” and instead perpetuating practices that Ghanaians had previously rejected. Mahama’s comments, made during a television panel discussion, centered on the perceived incongruity between the government’s rhetoric of change and its actions, particularly concerning recent political developments. He argued that the administration’s approach, far from representing a fresh start, has instead mirrored and even amplified problematic behaviors from the past, raising serious concerns about the government’s commitment to true reform and its respect for democratic principles.
Central to Awudu Mahama’s criticism is the apparent contradiction between the promised “reset” and the government’s actions. He defines a reset as a fundamental shift towards improved governance, rectifying past mistakes and ushering in a new era of positive change. However, he contends that the current administration’s conduct has deviated significantly from this ideal. He points to specific instances, such as the mass retirement of senior military officers, alleged invasions of private properties, and the manner in which arrests have been conducted, as evidence of a troubling pattern that belies the government’s promises. These actions, in Mahama’s view, represent a continuation, and even an escalation, of practices that Ghanaians had hoped would be consigned to the past.
The mass retirement of over 40 senior military officers, ostensibly due to the appointment of a junior officer as Chief of Defence Staff, serves as a stark illustration of Mahama’s concerns. He highlights the unprecedented nature of this action within the context of Ghana’s Fourth Republic, suggesting that it sets a dangerous precedent and raises questions about the government’s motivations. The implication is that these retirements were not based on merit or performance but rather on political considerations, aimed at consolidating power and removing potential rivals. This, according to Mahama, directly contradicts the spirit of a reset and undermines the professionalism and stability of the military.
Furthermore, Awudu Mahama expresses deep concern over alleged invasions of private properties and the conduct of state security agencies during arrests. He argues that these actions not only infringe upon fundamental rights but also create an atmosphere of fear and intimidation, undermining the rule of law. He draws a parallel between the current administration’s behavior and the practices of its predecessors, which it had previously condemned. This, in his view, demonstrates a disturbing lack of commitment to genuine change and a willingness to resort to tactics that erode democratic norms.
The journalist’s overarching argument is that the government’s actions are not only failing to deliver on the promise of a reset but are actively undermining the very principles of good governance that such a reset should embody. He sees a pattern of behavior that prioritizes political expediency over adherence to the rule of law, suggesting a troubling disconnect between the government’s rhetoric and its actions. This, he argues, represents a betrayal of the public’s trust and a missed opportunity to address fundamental issues that hinder Ghana’s progress.
Awudu Mahama’s critique serves as a poignant reminder of the importance of holding governments accountable for their promises and ensuring that their actions align with their stated intentions. His concerns regarding the mass military retirements, alleged property invasions, and the conduct of security agencies highlight the potential for power to be misused and the need for constant vigilance in safeguarding democratic principles. His call for a genuine reset, one that truly breaks with the past and embraces a new era of transparent and accountable governance, resonates deeply with the aspirations of a citizenry seeking positive change.
