The recent eruption of violence during the Council of State elections in Ghana has sparked widespread condemnation and calls for introspection, particularly regarding the escalating politicization of this crucial advisory body. Mr. Benjamin Kofi Quashie, Chairman of the South African Council of Elders for the National Democratic Congress (NDC), expressed deep disappointment over the incident, characterizing it as “very unfortunate” and a stark deviation from the intended non-partisan nature of the Council. Speaking on Joy Prime’s Newspaper Review, Mr. Quashie underscored the importance of depoliticizing the Council of State elections, lamenting the increasing trend of partisan maneuvering and claims of victory by both the NDC and the NPP. This politicization, he argues, undermines the very essence of the Council, which was designed to offer impartial counsel to the President on matters of national importance. He therefore advocated for a thorough reevaluation of the Council’s roles, selection processes, and even potential constitutional amendments to align its functioning with the original vision of providing objective advice devoid of political influence.
The core concern raised by Mr. Quashie revolves around the growing partisan influence within the Council of State, which he believes contradicts the fundamental principles enshrined in Ghana’s Constitution. The Council, envisioned as a source of unbiased guidance for the President, is increasingly becoming a stage for political posturing and power plays. This politicization, he argued, not only detracts from the Council’s ability to provide impartial advice but also erodes public trust in the institution. Mr. Quashie’s call for a reassessment of the Council’s structure and function stems from a deep-seated concern that the current electoral process, susceptible to political manipulation, is undermining the very purpose for which the Council was established. He believes that decoupling the Council from partisan politics is essential to restoring its credibility and ensuring its effectiveness in providing objective counsel to the President.
Responding to accusations leveled against the NDC for instigating the violence during the elections, Mr. Quashie vehemently refuted these claims, accusing the New Patriotic Party (NPP) of employing double standards in its condemnation of political violence. He emphasized the importance of consistent accountability, urging both parties to unequivocally denounce all acts of violence, regardless of the perpetrator’s political affiliation. He recounted previous instances of alleged attacks on NDC members under the NPP administration, citing examples like the raids on the homes of Mr. Agyenim Boateng and Dr. Ayine, to highlight what he perceived as a pattern of selective outrage from the NPP. Mr. Quashie stressed that condemnation of violence should be universal and not contingent on the political affiliation of the perpetrators.
Mr. Quashie’s criticism of the NPP centered on what he perceived as a hypocritical approach to condemning political violence, arguing that the party often overlooks or downplays acts of violence committed by its own members while readily condemning similar actions by the NDC. He characterized this as a dangerous precedent, emphasizing that nation-building requires fairness, objectivity, and a commitment to upholding the principles of the Constitution regardless of political allegiances. He acknowledged that there are actions within the NDC that he and others do not condone but insisted that selective condemnation, driven by partisan interests, is detrimental to the country’s progress. He challenged the NPP to abandon this “posturing” and adopt a more principled stance against all forms of political violence.
The call for a re-evaluation of the Council of State’s structure and function is not merely a reaction to the recent violence but a broader reflection on the increasing politicization of this crucial advisory body. Mr. Quashie’s concerns resonate with the growing apprehension that partisan interests are overshadowing the Council’s primary role of providing impartial advice to the President. The debate surrounding the Council’s future underscores the need for a national conversation about the balance between political representation and the preservation of its non-partisan character. The incidents of violence, while deeply regrettable, have served as a catalyst for a much-needed discussion about the Council’s role in Ghana’s governance framework.
Ultimately, the debate surrounding the Council of State highlights a broader challenge facing Ghanaian democracy: the increasing polarization of political discourse and the erosion of trust in institutions. Addressing the concerns raised by Mr. Quashie and others requires not only a reassessment of the Council’s structure and function but also a concerted effort by all political actors to foster a more inclusive and less partisan political environment. The future of the Council of State, and indeed the health of Ghanaian democracy, depends on the willingness of all stakeholders to prioritize national interests over partisan gains and to uphold the principles of fairness, objectivity, and accountability in all aspects of governance.
