Must Stop Misinforming On Ghana

Qanawu Gabby

The Daily Dispatch carried a front page story on Friday, May 28, 'Prez. Mills Likely To Win in 2012 - EIU'. Ben Ephson's paper's report said 'The Economist Intelligence Unit's (EIU) May , 2010 overview on Ghana has hinted that there is the likelihood of President John Atta Mills winning the 2012 presidential elections for a second and final four-year term.'

It continued, 'The analysis states in part that whoever wins the New Patriotic Party (NPP) 2010 flagbearer nomination will have a very difficult task of beating President Mills, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) candidate for 2012. The EIU states that it “will not be an easy task. The government's finances were in state of disarray when the NPP left power and the NDC has so far done a fairly satisfactory job of narrowing the large fiscal deficit that the NPP left behind.

"In addition, the usual spat of political, recriminations by the party in power has cast a dim light over many in the NPP since the NDC came to power. This is very much in line with what the NPP did when it came to power in 2000 and makes it difficult for newly-removed parties to regain power after just one election cycle. It is more likely that only after two terms in power will there be a possibility that the public will begin to look for alternatives. However, much of how easy or difficult it will be to dislodge the NDC depends on the NDC.”

While, the above quotes were contained in the EIU report, it is difficult to put more weight on it than the ground reality would allow. It is also not proper to ignore the observations made by the EIU in that same May report. The EIU executive summary on Ghana's outlook for 2010-2011 begins "The president, John Atta Mills, and his ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC) will have to balance honouring their electoral promises with stabilising the economy during a fragile recovery in global growth." Ordinarily, this should have made the Daily Dispatch exercise some caution with its headline.

The EIU report, however, made an observation, which is arguably fundamentally flawed. On the NPP presidential nomination, the EIU says, "After narrowly losing the 2008 election to John Atta Mills and the then opposition National Democratic Congress, Mr Akufo-Addo is likely to face an uphill battle in convincing NPP supporters that he is the man to take back the country from the NDC."

This is clearly a statement one can only term as laptop theorisation, based on a distant foreign assumption and not on the ground politics of Ghana. Also, when juxtaposed against the other EIU distant observation that whoever the NPP chooses will have a difficult task of beating the NDC there is a temptation to deny that statement of credibility, as well. But, it is trite knowledge that beating an incumbent is difficult and 2012 is not going to be easy for both major parties by any stretch of the imagination. It calls for unity, hard work and how much you can convince the majority of struggling Ghanaians to buy your message. It will also hang on the integrity of the ballot - absolutely crucial. Fortunately who triumphs is a decision to be made by voters ultimately and not just by the political parties.

In the Dec 7, 2008 presidential race, Akufo-Addo beat Prof Mills, who was contesting for the third time, with more than 102,000 votes. Nana got 49.13% of the total votes cast, placing him first but fell 74,000 votes short of the more than 50% needed. It was the best ever performance for a first time presidential candidate under the Fourth Republic. Nana had effectively less than six months to campaign. His campaign team was compelled by lack of relative face recognition to mount big billboards across the country, which decision has been lambasted after the facts.

In the Dec 28 run-off, Nana got more votes than on Dec 7, the combined ‘Yere Se Sa Mu’ (Change) votes overtook Nana but by less than 0.5% - the smallest margin of defeat ever in Africa’s political history (discounting Somaliland). In spite of the collective opposition call for ‘Change’, the 2008 election showed a split in the two parties’/two candidates’ share of the swing/floating/undecided votes. Though NPP came first in the presidential race on Dec 7, by losing its parliamentary majority to the NDC, the NDC campaign message in the run-off was simple: ‘We have won Parliament. Now give us the Presidency.’

Although, there is no scientific opinion poll to that effect, the common observation in Ghana seems to be that Nana Akufo-Addo is the front runner in the NPP nomination and therefore the candidate to beat. Even his main rivals may attest to this. Also, by coming that close (he lost to Prof Mills by less than 0.5%) on his first time out in a difficult economic year for a party seeking a third term against a candidate whose face had been on the presidential ticket since 1996, there is every indication that the NPP rank and file see Nana Akufo-Addo as their best chance for victory in 2012. The 2008 election ended in a photo finish and it gives the NDC not the kind of comfort margin that previous presidents enjoyed in their first term.

There are two traditions that have developed in Ghana's presidential elections since 1992. One, no presidential candidate has won in his first outing. J J Rawlings had been head of state for 11 years before the 1992 race. J A Kufuor lost to Rawlings in 1996 before beating Vice President Mills in 2000 and 2004. The second tradition is that each of the previous presidents were allowed to exhaust their two four-year presidential terms by the electorate.

The EIU notes this when it says, "It is more likely that only after two terms in power will there be a possibility that the public will begin to look for alternatives."

The EIU continues with a profound point, which was, however, missed or ignored by the Daily Dispatch: "However, much of how easy or difficult it will be to dislodge the NDC depends on the NDC." It will depend on how disappointed or pleased Ghanaians may be with the NDC and how government-in-waiting-like the NPP can show itself to be.

For the NPP, their best chance of upsetting this two-term tradition is to put their best foot forward. The margin of defeat by Akufo-Addo to Mills was the closest in Ghana's history. This means that the evidence so far suggests that Akufo-Addo is the NPP's best chance of making Mills a one-term president. That is not to say that another candidate may not do better. But, anything else would be a big chance game for the NPP. The question is whether or not the party is prepared to play that kind of chacha with its 2012 chances. In the absence of any scientific opinion poll it is difficult to conclude otherwise.

I will advise the EIU to stick to economic analysis and spare us its pedestrian take on Ghanaian politics. On Akufo-Addo, it says, "Even within his own party in the run-up to the 2008 election, Mr Akufo-Addo's candidacy threatened to cause a split, as many supported his nearest challenger, Alan Kyerematen. Mr Akufo-Addo is a member of the Akyem tribe, and many in the NPP felt that the presidential candidacy should have gone to Mr Kyerematen, an Ashanti, in 2008."

This is not the first time that the EIU has sought to create the impression that the NPP is bewitched by ethnic politics on Akyem/Ashanti lines. Let the EIU be verily informed that the NPP is bigger than Ashanti and Akyem. Both two main political parties in Ghana have some strong ethnic support base. In fact, it seems difficult to make any useful electoral pitch without any solid base - being it ethnic, class or ideological.

Yet, we should not reduce Ghanaian politics to that. The NPP, for instance, is a party which controls 107 seats (plus 3 associated independents) of a 230 unicameral legislature. Its MPs from Akyem and Ashanti are less 40% of the total number. Akufo-Addo got more votes, in relative terms, from the Ashanti Region than from his own Eastern Region in 2008. I will advise the EIU to stop discrediting Ghana and misinforming its subscribers on Ghana's politics and the Ashanti/Akyem issue in the NPP. If the fault is with its local sources then it should rethink on the people it relies on for information on Ghana's politics.

The EIU even goes on to say that "Mr Kyerematen's previous loss to Mr Akufo-Addo was by a slim margin and his supporters and those of his rival was seen at the time as being vital to keeping the party from formally splitting."

Is the EIU trying a post facto damage control after it predicted with generous alarmism that the NPP risked a split in 2008? Again, Nana Akufo-Addo beat Alan Kyerematen by some 15% margin in a contest of 17 candidates. Is that a slim margin? Certainly, Mr Kyerematen's showing in the December 2007 showing was respectable and gave a clear indication then that he was arguably the next in line. But, coming second does not mean you came close and the EIU should know this.

In the 2007 NPP National Congress, Nana and Alan competed against 15 others, most of whom were party heavyweights. Alan received 738 votes. Nana got 1,096 votes from the total of 2,293 representing 47.60%. It was a remarkable endorsement under the circumstances.

Please EIU, if you don't have any elementary insight on politics in Ghana it is not compulsory for you to invent your facts and observations. Leave our politics alone or risk discrediting how your country reports, which don't come cheap, are viewed.

qanawu.blog.spot.com