The political landscape of Kadjebi in Ghana’s Oti Region has been roiled by a recent protest involving the barricading of key government offices. Specifically, the offices of the National Disaster Management Organisation (NADMO) and the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) were targeted by individuals purportedly aligned with the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC). This action has ignited a passionate debate within the community, dividing residents and party members alike. The core issue revolves around the perceived fairness and justification of the appointments of the current NADMO District Director and the NHIS Scheme Manager.
The protest’s proponents argue that the individuals currently holding these positions were already gainfully employed prior to their appointments, while other equally deserving party loyalists who actively contributed to the NDC’s 2024 electoral victory remain unemployed. This has led to accusations of greed and a sense of betrayal among those who feel overlooked for these opportunities. The sentiment among supporters of the barricade centers on the belief that these positions should be allocated to those who lack employment and require the financial security and status afforded by such appointments. They see it as a matter of prioritizing the needs of the party’s dedicated but unemployed members, viewing the current officeholders’ acceptance of these roles as an act of self-interest at the expense of their comrades.
Mr. Kwami Avornyo, a Kadjebi resident, expressed his support for the protest, characterizing it as a justified response to the perceived injustice. He contended that those already employed should step aside and allow unemployed party members to assume these roles, thereby ensuring a more equitable distribution of opportunities within the party. This perspective highlights the economic anxieties prevalent in the community and underscores the importance of government appointments in providing livelihoods and upward mobility. The protesters see these appointments not just as political plums but as crucial economic lifelines.
Further fueling the discontent is the case of Mr. Reuben Kemavor, the current NADMO District Director. An anonymous NDC member, who is also a teacher, questioned Mr. Kemavor’s appointment, pointing out that he already holds a position as a School Improvement Support Officer (SISO). This raises the question of capacity and whether one individual can effectively manage the responsibilities of two demanding public roles. The protesters argue that holding multiple positions not only concentrates power but also deprives other qualified individuals of opportunities for employment and professional development. This highlights a broader concern about resource allocation and the perceived monopolization of opportunities by a select few.
However, the protest has also drawn criticism from within the NDC. Mr. Michael Ekpe, another party member, acknowledged the frustration among those feeling sidelined but offered a different perspective. He argued that the party faces a shortage of qualified personnel to fill certain critical positions, thus necessitating the appointments of individuals who may already hold other jobs. This highlights the tension between rewarding loyal party members with positions and ensuring that those positions are filled by competent individuals capable of effectively discharging their duties. Mr. Ekpe’s remarks suggest a pragmatic approach, emphasizing the need to prioritize the overall functionality and effectiveness of the government over the individual aspirations of party members. He called for greater understanding and compromise within the party, urging members to consider the broader context of the appointments and work towards a resolution that benefits all stakeholders.
The barricading incident has undoubtedly created a rift within the NDC in Kadjebi. As the party leadership works to address the situation internally, the underlying issues of equitable distribution of opportunities, the qualifications and capacity of appointees, and the balance between rewarding party loyalty and ensuring effective governance remain central to the ongoing debate. The incident serves as a microcosm of the broader challenges faced by political parties in managing internal dynamics, balancing competing interests, and ensuring fair representation while also striving to deliver effective and competent governance. The resolution of this conflict will likely require a delicate balancing act, addressing the legitimate concerns of those feeling marginalized while also upholding the need for qualified and experienced individuals in key government positions.
