In a republic where words shape memory and memory shapes destiny, the integrity of public commentary is not a luxury—it is a civic duty.

When analysis becomes theatre and critique becomes caricature, we must pause and restore the covenant of truth.

It is in this spirit that I respond to Martin Kpebu’s recent remarks on TV3’s Key Points program, where he declared that “Dr Bawumia can never be President” and described the Vice President’s performance as “abysmal.”

Such pronouncements are not merely reckless; they are characteristic of a troubling trend in Ghanaian political discourse: selective reasoning masquerading as analysis.

The Vice Presidency and historical amnesia

Kpebu’s critique of Dr Bawumia’s vice-presidential legacy lacks historical grounding.

Since the inception of the Fourth Republic in 1992, no Vice President—from Ekow
Nkensen Arkaah to John Mahama—has operated with a distinct policy framework
directly attributed to their office.

The role has traditionally been supportive, not executive.

To single out Dr Bawumia for failing to deliver what no Vice President has ever been mandated to do is not only ahistorical—it is intellectually dishonest.

Even during Ghana’s Third Republic (1979–1981), Vice President Joseph W S de
Graft-Johnson served under President Hilla Limann without holding executive power.

His role was that of a constitutional assistant, not a co-executive.

The presidency alone held the mandate of executive authority.

De Graft-Johnson, a distinguished engineer, academic, and jurist, brought developmental and legal expertise to the administration, but his position did not entail autonomous leadership.

This precedent affirms that the vice-presidential office has historically been one of support, not command.

The Contradictions of Partisan Memory

Even more perplexing is Kpebu’s unwavering support for former President John
Mahama, whose presidency was marred by economic instability and allegations of
corruption.

Mahama’s rejection by the electorate in both 2016 and 2020 was not marginal—it was resounding.

Yet, Kpebu continues to advocate for his return in 2024, while simultaneously dismissing Dr Bawumia’s candidacy with sweeping
generalisations.

This contradiction undermines the credibility of his analysis and raises questions about the objectivity of his political stance.

The Age Argument and Selective Ageism

Kpebu’s claim that Dr Bawumia is “too old” to lead Ghana by 2028 is equally
flawed.

At 65, Bawumia would be younger than many global leaders who have served
with distinction. Curiously, Kpebu defends Johnson Asiedu Nketiah—who will be 72 by then—as “qualified” to lead the NDC.

Such selective ageism reveals a glaring inconsistency in his logic and suggests that his criticisms are driven more by political bias than reasoned judgment.

Integrity and the Record of Service

The accusation that Dr Bawumia “cannot fight corruption” is perhaps the most
unfounded of all.

With a public service record spanning nearly three decades—from the Bank of Ghana to the Vice Presidency—Dr Bawumia has maintained an unblemished
reputation.

No credible allegations of personal enrichment or abuse of office have ever been leveled against him.

In contrast, Kpebu’s preferred candidate, John Mahama, has been linked to multiple scandals, including the Ford Expedition gift and the Airbus bribery saga.

To claim that Mahama is better positioned to fight corruption than Bawumia defies logic and insults the discernment of a vigilant citizenry.

The People, Not the Pundits

Integrity, if it is to mean anything in our political discourse, must be measured by consistency, fairness, and evidence.

Dr Bawumia’s record—clean, competent, and principled—stands in stark contrast to the caricature painted by Kpebu.

Political debate should be robust, but it must also be rooted in truth. When commentators

abandon objectivity for partisan theatrics, they do a disservice not only to their audience but to the democratic process itself.

As for the claim that Dr Bawumia “can never be President,” history offers a cautionary tale.

Similar pronouncements were made about Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, yet he rose to become one of Ghana’s most consequential leaders.

Destiny, as ever, is the sacred trust of the people—and the province of Providence.

Benediction: A Call to Civic Discernment

Let us not trade the dignity of our democracy for the drama of punditry.

Let us speak with clarity, critique with fairness, and remember that in the end, it is not the loudest voice that prevails, but the most consistent truth.

Civil rights groups and civil society organizations must raise their voices when biased punditry, cloaked in political garb, floods our national discourse.

Silence in the face of rhetorical distortion is complicity.

When commentary abandons truth for theatrics, it is not merely a lapse in judgment—it is an erosion of civic integrity.

The guardians of democracy must not only speak—they must discern, correct, and consecrate the truth.

Ghana deserves a discourse worthy of its democratic aspirations.

Let us rise to that calling—with reason, with reverence, and with resolve.