In his speech, he declared that ‘reciprocal tariffs’ would be imposed on almost all countries, whether friends or foes.

He spent virtually the rest of the speech justifying this action, notably with the aid of a visual chart.

By the time he left the Rose Garden and headed back to the West Wing of the White House, one thing had become abundantly clear: there had been a radical change in the global affairs.

This significant shift in global power dynamics was not sudden. The signs had been there for almost a decade before this historic announcement.

From the rise of Trump in 2016 and his ‘America First’ agenda to ‘Brexit’ and the powerful wave of far-right politics and protectionism that swept across the West and South America.

This movement produced leaders such as Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil, Javier Milei of Argentina, and Marine Le Pen of France.

Donald Trump’s tariff impositions can thus be described as a manifestation of this change in global affairs because the entire world, especially long-standing allies of the U.S in the West, learned that day that the U.S is no longer a reliable partner.

This is why President John Mahama, in his inaugural speech following his swearing-in as President, highlighted the changes in international affairs and Ghana’s potential place within it.

Nearly two years into his term, he is taking steps to position Ghana within this mutating geopolitical space.

BRICS is an international organisation made up of eleven countries. It is important to note that the name BRICS is itself an acronym formed from the first letters of the founding nations of the organisation: Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.

Economist Jim O’Neill is credited with coining the acronym ‘BRIC’ in an article he wrote in 2001 about the emerging economies he believed would shake up the global status quo in the near future.

The agenda of BRICS focuses largely on economic issues, such as facilitating trade among member nations and partner countries, as well as combating the dominance of the U.S dollar in the current international financial architecture.

Consequently, countries such as Ghana that choose to join the organisation look forward to enjoying its aforementioned economic benefits.

Although BRICS, as an organisation, has decided to move beyond its economic-focused mandate to embrace ‘non-controversial’ issues such as climate change and the fight against terrorism, the fact remains that any country that applies to become a member of the organisation is deemed to be taking a firm geopolitical stance against the West, particularly the United States of America.

This is because of the ongoing tussle for geopolitical supremacy between the United States of America and China.

There is also the added fact that Russia and China, both founding members of the organisation, are regarded as adversaries of the U.S.

This position is further reinforced by the fact that Iran, a country with which the United States is currently at war, also became a full member of BRICS in 2024.

In essence, Ghana is seeking to join an organisation that includes the country rivaling the U.S in economic and technological might (China); the country with which the U.S spent almost the entire twentieth century engaged in a Cold War (Russia); and the country with which it is currently at war (Iran).

This must also be considered in light of the fact that the current occupant of the Oval Office is a capricious man who has threatened genocide multiple times and abducted the president of another country.

A counterargument to the above is that, as a sovereign country, Ghana is free to join whichever organisation it pleases.

Additionally, Ghana’s decision to join BRICS does not mean that it seeks to sever its relations with the U.S and the other major powers in the West.

Indeed, China, in particular, maintains very cordial bilateral relations with prominent Western European countries such as France, Germany, the United Kingdom and Italy.

This is evident in their collective membership of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), which was founded by China and is headquartered in Beijing.

Moreover, despite the well-documented issues between the U.S and China, ranging from trade practices and territorial disputes to technological rivalry, an argument could be made that tensions between the two countries have been sensationalised.

This is evident in the fact that, just about a month ago, President Trump literally rolled out the red carpet for President Xi Jinping, beginning on the tarmac where his plane landed.

China’s president was not only greeted at the airport by Donald Trump but was also serenaded by the US military band and entertained with a ceremonial flyover by two U.S military jets.

Following this display of pageantry on the tarmac at Joint Base Andrews, Xi Jinping and his wife were treated to a state dinner at the White House.

The dinner brought together top American political and business leaders, who fraternised with China’s first couple, as well as the delegation accompanying them.

Russia’s Vladimir Putin has also been a recipient of the pomp and pageantry displayed by the United States.

Just last year, he, too, had the red carpet rolled out for him in Alaska, along with a tarmac reception hosted by Donald Trump.

These examples clearly demonstrate that the geopolitical landscape is far more complex and sophisticated than most people perceive it to be.

It must be noted that Ghana’s decision to join BRICS comes with a number of potential benefits. One obvious benefit is the opportunity to access financing from the New Development Bank.

The bank finances projects in countries affiliated with BRICS on favourable terms compared with those offered by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

It also provides the government with additional financing options if it needs funding to implement its policies.

There is also the added benefit of reducing the dependence on the U.S dollar by using the cedi for trade. China, India and Indonesia, which are members of BRICS, are three of the most populous countries in the world.

This gives Ghanaian businesses an opportunity to access a much larger market.

The organisation can also serve as a vehicle for advocating reforms in institutions such as the United Nations, particularly its Security Council.

The last two Presidents of Ghana have advocated for an African country to be included as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council.

President Mahama is also on record as having complained about the stringent conditions attached to loans received by African nations from institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

BRICS provides a platform through which the Global South can pursue these objectives and potentially achieve them sooner rather than later.

Elections have consequences, and the fact that Ghana is gearing up to join BRICS under President John Mahama’s tenure is no coincidence.

The President is a member of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), a left-leaning political party. He is also an avowed believer in the ideals of Dr Kwame Nkrumah and is courageous enough to call out the ills of the West.

This is evidenced by the op-ed he wrote in defence of South Africa when Donald Trump made unfounded claims about the country, as well as his ‘subtle’ rebuttal of the US President’s threat to commit genocide.

His advocacy for the lifting of sanctions against Fidel Castro’s Cuba and his strong insistence on Palestine’s right to self-determination reveal him to be a true left-leaning politician.

Additionally, the fact that BRICS is led by Russia and China, two countries known for practising extreme forms of left-wing politics and governance, undermines any assertion that the President’s personal biases played no role in this decision.

At the end of the day one thing that is clear is that the geopolitical landscape has well and truly changed. And just like it is with every other country, Ghana has to take decisions that she believes would be in her best interest.

The decision to join BRICS has already generated debate and the pros and cons of joining this organization have already been outlined.

Regardless of how this decision plays out, history is going to remember this period as the time a leftist politician from Bole staged a stunning political comeback and then proceeded to take one of the most consequential foreign policy decisions in Ghana’s history.

The announcement came during a visit by India’s External Affairs Minister, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar.

Nothing has been decided beyond this intention: admission needs the agreement of existing members, no application date has been given and officials have not said whether Ghana would accept the lighter “partner country” status first.

Five points frame the rest of this article:

Ghana already trades heavily with BRICS economies.

Four of them (the UAE, India, South Africa and China) took roughly 57% of Ghana’s 2025 export earnings, from Ghana Statistical Service data.

Membership would formalise an existing pattern more than redirect trade.

The most useful financial tools are reachable without full membership

The New Development Bank (NDB) admits members who are not in BRICS and cedi-yuan settlement is already being piloted by Stanbic Bank Ghana, a commercial bank.

The main risk is sequencing, not the bloc itself

AGOA access expires on 31 December 2026, a bespoke US trade deal is unfinished and Ghana is rebuilding its standing with international investors after a debt default.

BRICS is a divided club

Its members include Iran, Russia and the UAE, and recent summits papered over sharp disagreements.

A staged approach looks stronger than a leap

Partner status, NDB membership and payment corridors capture much of the upside while keeping full membership as an option.

1. What has actually been announced

Ablakwa told reporters the Cabinet had decided to put in a formal application and that Ghana had already asked India, the BRICS chair for 2026, for help with the process.

He framed the move as diversification, saying Ghana will not walk away from traditional partners but wants “new friends”.

He stressed that Ghana remains a member of the IMF and the World Bank and cited roughly US$700 million of support from Afreximbank during the 2023–24 crisis as evidence that non-Western institutions already matter to Ghana.

Jaishankar was warm but careful. He described India as sympathetic to Ghana’s aspirations and called the request a matter for collective consideration by the bloc.

Two Ghana–India memoranda (agriculture, and science and technology) were signed alongside the announcement, with further cooperation flagged in railways, pharmaceuticals, ICT and defence.

What is not yet known: the date of the formal application, the category of membership Ghana will seek, any response from other members and what the government’s cost-benefit analysis shows.

The Minority in Parliament, led by the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Samuel Abu Jinapor, has demanded an urgent briefing.

2. What BRICS membership is, and is not

It is a consensus club with two tiers

BRICS now lists 11 members: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, plus Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, the UAE and Indonesia, with Saudi Arabia invited but not publicly confirmed.

A separate partner tier, created in 2024, includes Nigeria and Uganda from Africa, along with Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Thailand, Uzbekistan and Vietnam.

Partners join selected activities but do not take part in the most consequential decisions. Egypt, Ethiopia and South Africa are the only African full members, and West Africa has none, so Ghana would be the first.

It is not a common currency

The September 2026 New Delhi summit endorsed work on payment-system interoperability and local-currency settlement, and it did not revive the idea of a BRICS currency.

Even the strongest example of de-dollarisation, India–Russia trade, reached its high share of national-currency settlement through bilateral arrangements, not a bloc-wide mechanism.

It is not a harmonious alliance

BRICS foreign ministers failed to agree a joint statement in May amid the war involving Iran, and the leaders’ declaration in September avoided condemning either the US-Israeli strikes or Iranian attacks on Gulf states.

Iran and the UAE are both members. This matters for Ghana because the UAE is its single largest export market.

It does include financial institutions

The NDB, headquartered in Shanghai, lends for infrastructure and sustainable development and has been asked by leaders to expand local-currency lending.

The Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA), a roughly US$100 billion liquidity backstop for members facing balance-of-payments stress, only serves members.

The September summit approved amendments to the CRA treaty and a further test run.

3. Why is Ghana moving now?

Several currents converge in late 2026.

A stabilised economy gives the government confidence.

The IMF Executive Board completed the sixth and final review of Ghana’s roughly US$3 billion Extended Credit Facility in July 2026 and moved Ghana to a 36-month Policy Coordination Instrument, which carries IMF monitoring but no new money.

The Fund says inflation fell sharply, reserves nearly doubled by 2025, the primary balance swung to surplus and the risk of debt distress returned to moderate.

Fitch upgraded Ghana to B (positive outlook) in May, Moody’s moved its outlook to positive on Caa1 in April, and S&P rates Ghana B-.

Western support is more transactional.

USAID has been dismantled and the United States proposed a health compact worth US$109 million over five years as a replacement.

Ghana’s Cabinet rejected it over health-data and specimen-sharing demands, with President Mahama calling the terms humiliating.

For context, US assistance to Ghana was about US$219 million in 2024, of which US$96 million was for health.

US tariffs on Ghanaian goods reached 15% in August 2025 before the Supreme Court ruled in February 2026 that the emergency-powers statute used to impose them does not authorise tariffs.

Other doors have opened

China began zero-tariff treatment for Ghana and other African partners on 1 May 2026. The Bank of Ghana says banks are already piloting cedi payments for Chinese imports, with Stanbic Bank Ghana live and GCB preparing a similar service.

India, after Prime Minister Modi’s July 2025 visit, has become a major buyer of Ghanaian gold and President Mahama says Ghana’s exports to India rose from about US$3 billion to nearly US$7 billion.

(Some reports describe the US$7 billion as two-way trade, so the figure should be treated with care.)

The policy narrative is resource sovereignty

The government wants to stop exporting raw materials and capture more value from gold, cocoa and minerals, a theme that links to its 24-Hour Economy and export programmes. BRICS is presented as another route to capital, technology and markets for that agenda.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS

Trade: formalising what already exists

Ghana’s export base is narrow and tilted toward BRICS economies. Gold bullion was about two-thirds of export earnings in the fourth quarter of 2025, and the top five destinations took 71.2% of 2025 export earnings:

Adding the four BRICS rows gives about 57%. Much of this reflects the mechanics of the gold trade, which flows through Dubai, Indian refiners and South African and Swiss hubs, more than any strategic choice.

On imports, China is Ghana’s largest supplier, at roughly 22–23% of imports in recent quarters according to the Ghana Statistical Service.

The implication is that BRICS membership would not suddenly open new markets. Its value lies in lowering frictions with partners Ghana already depends on, and in giving Ghana a stronger negotiating voice with them.

The corollary is a concentration risk: deeper integration with a handful of gold and import counterparties does little for diversification.

Industrialisation and value addition

The government’s strongest argument is that Ghana wants to move up the value chain. Indian interest in pharmaceuticals and vaccine manufacturing, railways and agriculture fits that goal and the new India MoUs point in the same direction.

The evidence so far also carries a warning. China’s proposed purchase of Atlantic Lithium (about US$210 million), the developer of Ghana’s first lithium mine at Ewoyaa, would place the country’s first lithium output in a Chinese supply chain.

South-South partnership does not guarantee local processing. Whether Ghana gets value addition depends on contract terms, local-content rules and bargaining power, and BRICS membership does not set those.

Jobs and exposure to the West

The immediate employment risk is not BRICS but AGOA. The US duty-free preference programme runs for Ghana until 31 December 2026 and renewal is undecided.

Garments and cocoa products are the main beneficiaries, and the trade minister has said a single garment factory can employ up to 5,000 people.

The EU, meanwhile, is a long-standing cocoa market and its deforestation regulation takes effect on 30 December 2026.

Both are reminders that the livelihoods most exposed to Western rules are concentrated in sectors where Ghana has few substitutes.

Aid, health and sovereignty

The health compact episode shows where the public case for BRICS is strongest: a government that wants to negotiate without conditions it regards as intrusive.

But rejecting US$109 million over five years also has a cost, and Ghana has not yet shown how health financing will be replaced.

The Accra Reset initiative and Mahama’s health-sovereignty agenda are, so far, aspirations rather than funded programmes.

Distribution

Cheaper Chinese imports help consumers and importers but compete with local manufacturers.

Zero-tariff access to China helps cocoa and other exporters, but Ghana’s goods trade with China remains lopsided: Chinese figures put two-way trade at US$14.1 billion in 2025 with Ghana’s exports to China at US$2.67 billion, implying an imbalance of roughly US$11 billion (my calculation). Without a strategy to lift exports and local production, deeper ties could widen that gap.

The writer, Daniel Afari-Djan, is the Business Development Manager in charge of Personal & Private Banking at Stanbic Bank Ghana. He is also holds an MSc in International Business from the University of Ghana Business School.

Note: Part 2 of this article features next week Monday

From food and rent to education and healthcare, the cost of meeting basic needs continues to be a concern for ordinary citizens.

Yet, for many people who depend on public transport every day, getting to work, school, the market, or home is becoming another source of financial and emotional stress.

Following the recent increase in fuel prices, transport fares have reportedly been adjusted upwards by 8 per cent.

While passengers may not welcome the increase, many understand that fuel prices affect the cost of operating commercial vehicles.

Drivers and their mates also have expenses to meet, and their concerns deserve to be acknowledged.

However, an important question must be asked: Are some commercial drivers and their mates charging passengers according to the agreed fare adjustment, or are they taking advantage of the situation to charge more?

Reports and experiences from some passengers suggest that certain drivers and their mates are adding GH₵2, GH₵3, or even more to existing fares, beyond the announced adjustment.

Passengers who question these charges may be met with harsh responses, insults, or unnecessary arguments.

This raises serious concerns about fairness, accountability, and the treatment of commuters who have little choice but to depend on these services.

When an 8% increase becomes something more

An 8 per cent increase should not become an excuse for arbitrary fare increases.

If an adjustment has been agreed upon by the relevant stakeholders, passengers should not be left at the mercy of individual drivers and mates who decide to charge whatever they consider appropriate.

The situation becomes even more frustrating when passengers are forced to pay multiple fares for a journey that should ordinarily be completed in one trip or with fewer changes.

A passenger travelling from Ashongman Estate to Accra may have to pay three separate fares before arriving at his or her destination.

Depending on the route and the availability of direct services, what should have been a straightforward journey can become a series of separate trips, each requiring another fare.

For a passenger making this journey daily, the additional cost can accumulate significantly over time.

Workers, students, traders, and other commuters may find themselves spending much more on transportation than they had budgeted for.

The concern is not that every driver must operate a direct service regardless of demand or operating costs.

Rather, it is that passengers should not be subjected to unnecessary financial burdens through practices that prioritize repeated loading over the completion of journeys, particularly when those practices leave commuters with little choice but to pay more.

Passengers should not be punished for needing transport

One of the most troubling aspects of this situation is the vulnerability of passengers at busy bus stops.

When people are stranded and vehicles are scarce, passengers may have little bargaining power.

They need to get to work on time, attend lectures, transport goods, attend appointments, or return home to their families.

Under such circumstances, many may accept additional charges simply because they cannot afford to wait indefinitely.

But should the desperation of commuters become an opportunity for some drivers and mates to make passengers pay more than they should?

Every extra cedi matters, especially to people who travel long distances daily.

The GH₵2 or GH₵3 that may appear insignificant to one person could make a meaningful difference to another who must also pay for food, rent, school fees, and other household expenses.

For low-income earners and people whose daily budgets are already stretched, even a small additional transport charge can have a considerable impact when repeated over several days or weeks.

Passengers are not asking for free transportation. They are asking for fairness, transparency, and respect.

The need for personal accountability

There is also a broader question of accountability that deserves attention.

It is common to hear these same drivers and their mates condemn corruption, dishonesty, and unfair practices in public life. Such concerns are legitimate.

However, the commitment to fairness must extend beyond public officials and institutions. It must also be reflected in our everyday dealings with one another.

Charging beyond agreed fares, where this occurs, or using circumstances to impose avoidable costs on passengers raises questions about personal responsibility.

If we expect those in positions of authority to act fairly, we must also be prepared to uphold fairness in our own professions and businesses.

This is not an accusation against every commercial driver or mate. Many work hard under difficult conditions, contend with traffic congestion, vehicle maintenance costs, and other operational challenges, and provide essential services to the public.

Their efforts should not be overlooked.

Nevertheless, genuine economic challenges should not be used to justify unfair treatment of passengers.

When fuel prices fall, what happens to transport fares?

Another concern frequently raised by commuters is the apparent reluctance of some drivers to reduce fares when fuel prices fall.

When fuel prices rise, transport operators may call for fare adjustments to reflect increased operating costs. However, passengers sometimes question why fares do not appear to decrease correspondingly when fuel prices decline.

This perception deserves serious attention.

Transport fares are influenced by more than fuel prices alone, including vehicle maintenance, spare parts, insurance, and other operating expenses.

Therefore, a reduction in fuel prices does not necessarily mean fares must fall by the same proportion or immediately.

Even so, there should be transparency in how fare adjustments are determined and communicated.

Passengers deserve to understand the basis for changes, just as transport operators deserve to have their legitimate costs considered.

A fair transport system cannot function effectively when passengers are left confused about what they should pay or feel powerless to question charges.

GPRTU must strengthen its oversight

The Ghana Private Road Transport Union (GPRTU) has an important role to play in addressing concerns about commercial transport operations and the relationship between drivers and passengers.

The union and other relevant transport authorities should take these complaints seriously and work towards practical solutions.

First, there should be stronger efforts to ensure that approved transport fares are communicated clearly and respected. Passengers should be able to establish what they are expected to pay without having to engage in arguments at bus stops.

Second, concerns about arbitrary fare increases should be investigated, and appropriate measures should be taken where violations are established.

Third, the union should engage transport operators on the practice of loading passengers in short stages, particularly where such practices create avoidable inconvenience and additional costs for commuters.

Routes, operating arrangements, and passenger demand may differ, but the needs of commuters must remain part of the discussion.

Finally, there should be an accessible and reliable complaints mechanism through which passengers can report overcharging, intimidation, verbal abuse, and other unfair practices.

Such a system should allow complaints to be investigated fairly, without automatically assuming that every allegation against a driver or mate is true.

Public education is equally important. Drivers, mates, and passengers should be made aware of approved fares, their respective responsibilities, and the appropriate channels for resolving disputes.

The objective should not be to create hostility between transport operators and commuters. It should be to build a system in which both parties understand their rights and obligations.

Drivers matter, but passengers matter too

It is important to recognize that commercial drivers and their mates also face economic difficulties.

They must maintain their vehicles, purchase fuel, meet other operating expenses and earn enough to support themselves and their families.

Their concerns should not be dismissed.

However, the challenges faced by transport operators do not erase the challenges faced by passengers.

Both groups are affected by the rising cost of living, and neither should be expected to carry an unreasonable share of the burden.

Drivers depend on passengers for their livelihoods, while passengers depend on drivers to reach their destinations. This relationship should be built on mutual respect, honesty, and fairness.

Passengers should not be insulted for asking questions about fares, and drivers should not be subjected to unfair accusations without evidence.

Where disagreements arise, there must be a reasonable way to resolve them.

Fairness must work both ways.

A Call for Action

GPRTU and the relevant transport authorities must not wait until these concerns escalate before taking action. Clearer communication, effective monitoring, fair enforcement, and accessible complaint channels can help address the problem and restore public confidence.

The ordinary Ghanaian is already navigating difficult economic circumstances. Transportation, which is essential to daily life, should not become an additional source of avoidable financial hardship.

This is a call for accountability, not condemnation. It is a call for a transport system that recognizes the needs of both those who provide the service and those who depend on it.

To the driver struggling to meet daily operational costs, your concerns matter. To the mate working hard to earn a living, your efforts matter.

But to the student trying to get to lectures, the worker rushing to the office, the trader heading to the market, and the parent returning home to care for the family, your concerns matter too.

Passengers are not walking ATMs. They are human beings with responsibilities, financial limitations and struggles of their own.

The fight against unfairness must begin not only with those in positions of authority but also with the choices we make in our everyday lives.

GPRTU, the concerns of commuters deserve your attention. Let us work towards a transport system where fares are respected, complaints are addressed, and both drivers and passengers are treated with dignity.

Because, ultimately, a fair transport system is not one that protects only the interests of operators or passengers. It is one that recognizes and respects the legitimate interests of both.

For what benefit to me, really? On 19th September, I cautioned against the plan to demolish the La Pleasure Beach. An exercise expected that Sunday did not proceed. The bulldozer stayed away for about two weeks.

And I know that my take here was responsible for the stalling of the demolition. I knew the lead national security officer involved was unhappy with my intervention. But my caution was neither political nor complicated.

I was not deciding who owned the land. I said simply: where rights and ownership are disputed, let the law and the courts speak before the bulldozer. Simply follow due process.

It reminded me of another caution I gave eight years ago, right here on the show. In 2018, plans were made to demolish state properties to make way for the National Cathedral. I warned, quote, “There is no need to build a cathedral on a foundation of lies.”

That was not a position against building a cathedral. It was a caution about proceeding when serious questions had been raised about the justification for demolishing relatively new state properties and the cost of replacing them elsewhere. Different controversy. Same instinct.

Before the state exercises enormous power in a manner that may be irreversible, simply be sure of the facts, the law and the consequences. That’s all.

About two weeks after my September caution, the bulldozers eventually moved into the La Pleasure Beach. And I have deliberately not spent the days since saying, “I told you so.” I have no property there.

I represent none of the competing interests. I have no personal interest in who ultimately establishes title. I was simply doing this job, my job.

My concern was what ought to be sound and proper in a society governed by laws. And now, the bulldozers have spoken.

The Senate says it requested National Security’s intervention because it considers the occupation unlawful and says it has a responsibility to protect valuable assets belonging ultimately to workers and pensioners.

Fine. Those asserting rights to the land say otherwise. We have heard them.

Let the competing documents, the evidence and the law determine who is right, not the bulldozer. Nobody needs a bulldozer to determine title to land. That doesn’t happen in a democracy.

That is what the court is there for. If you have to eject people, simply use due process. But now, we hear concerns from traditional authorities.

We hear the MP and the NDC party’s constituency leadership. There is an obvious political cost developing around the exercise. I’m shocked it was not foreseen.

And now, we hear about compensation. If compensation is lawfully due, by all means, compensate those entitled to it. But I hope we will also hear about accountability.

Because if an avoidable exercise results in compensation, litigation or eventually judgment debts, somebody must account for the decision that created that liability.

When I spoke first, I referred to the Polo Beach and the fact that they were in court with the same institutions that apparently gave National Security instructions. And National Security was actually also in court. And the lead person, Richard Jakpa, was also in court. And there was an injunction process that was pending.

I hope the answer is not simply to reach for the public purse in this compensation matter.

The taxpayer must not become the insurer of official impatience. Bulldoze today, compensate tomorrow, charge it to the taxpayer. Nobody answers. Move on.

That cannot be the normal order of governance. And this is bigger than La Pleasure Beach, SSNIT, National Security or any particular government.

It is bigger than any particular government. Governments change. Officials change. Political parties will change. State power remains.

And whenever that enormous power confronts genuinely disputed rights, restraint is not weakness.

Due process is not an inconvenience. Sometimes, it protects the citizens. Sometimes, it protects government from itself.

And sometimes, it protects the taxpayer from paying tomorrow for an avoidable decision made today.

That is why the rule of law is cheaper before the bulldozer than after it. Before the bulldozer, it requires patience, notice, documents, due process and, where necessary, a judge.

After the bulldozer, there may be compensation, litigation, judgment debts, political damage and taxpayer money.

Eight years ago, my caution was, “Don’t build a cathedral on a foundation of lies.”

On 19 September, my caution was, “Let the law and the courts speak before the bulldozer.”

Different controversies, same principle. I am not interested in saying, “I told you so.” I am interested in whether we learn.

Let the law speak first. Let the courts speak before the bulldozer. And that is my take.

When Cabinet turned down a proposed US health compact, it protected something most citizens never see: the record of their illnesses.

President Mahama explained the decision at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York on September 25, 2026.

The agreement was meant to replace health funding lost when USAID support ended. Cabinet balked at demands for Ghana’s pathogen profile and citizens’ medical records, and moved quickly to reject it.

The decision was right. It is also only the start of the work.
What was on the table
The reported figures differ, and the agreement’s text is not public. Everything here rests on the President’s account and press reports.

Reuters reportedly put the offer at $109 million over five years. One Ghanaian outlet describes a framework of about $300 million, with Ghana funding the remainder.

The President also named two other conditions: a Ghanaian cash contribution, and a bar on the Food and Drugs Authority (FDA) inspecting products brought in under the deal.
Ghana was not alone. KFF counted 35 countries that had signed the new US health agreements by September 11, most of them in Africa.

Nigeria and Uganda signed in December 2025, and their deals reportedly allow access to sensitive health data and pathogen specimens, with some terms running to 25 years of patient data. Zimbabwe and Namibia refused. Kenya, Tanzania and Rwanda signed.

Human Rights Watch reviewed seven of the agreements. It concluded that life-saving aid is being tied to surveillance data and to rights over pathogen samples, and that patient data could reach US drug companies without patient consent.

Those are findings about other countries’ agreements, not about Ghana’s draft.
Item
Reported figure

Direct US funding offered
$109 million over five years

Total framework (one outlet)
About $300 million; Ghana to fund the balance

Funding withdrawn from Ghana’s budget
$174 million

Resulting annual health shortfall
$74 million

Countries with signed US health deals
35 (KFF, September 11, 2026)

Patient data period in Nigeria/Uganda-type deals
Up to 25 years

Why individual records are different
Health data is not like other data. A leaked password can be changed. A diagnosis cannot. HIV status, a psychiatric history or a pregnancy outcome can cost a person a job, a marriage or standing in a community, and the harm lasts.

There are two kinds of data here, and the debate often blurs them. Aggregate surveillance data, such as case counts by district, is how outbreaks are caught and how countries cooperate. Identifiable patient records are another category.

The chairman of Parliament’s health committee drew the same line, calling individual medical data a red line. Ghana can share the first under clear rules.

The second should leave the country only with consent or a court order.
Pathogen data adds a commercial angle.

A sample from Ghana can become a vaccine or a diagnostic. Without a benefit-sharing clause, Ghana supplies the raw material and later buys the finished product back.
The price of refusing
The refusal has a cost.

The President said the withdrawal of $174 million programmed into the budget left a $74 million annual hole in health financing. That is the real tension. Sovereignty is easy to defend if you are not the clinic that loses its HIV commodities.

He linked the loss to the Accra Reset, an initiative aimed at health sovereignty through African production of medicines and vaccines.
Refusing is not the same as protecting
Turning down a foreign request does not secure data at home. Ghana has a legal base.

The Data Protection Act, 2012 (Act 843) set up the Data Protection Commission, and the Cybersecurity Act, 2020 (Act 1038) created the Cyber Security Authority. But a law is not a control.

Many facilities still run paper files or disconnected systems. Staff share logins. Few encrypt records or audit who opened them.
Integrity deserves as much attention as privacy. Integrity means a record is accurate, complete and unaltered.

A wrong allergy entry or a duplicate patient file can harm someone with no hacker involved.
A country that says “our data is ours” must show it can look after that data.

Otherwise the next donor will ask why it should trust the system.
What should happen, and by when
These are my proposals, not government policy. Each needs proper costing.
Timeline
Action

Within 90 days
Publish a national position: no export of identifiable patient records without consent or a court order; aggregate sharing only under written agreements. Review every existing donor and research agreement for data clauses, led by the Health Ministry, the Attorney-General and the Data Protection Commission. Publish the data and inspection terms of any future health agreement before signing and table them in Parliament.

Within 12 months
Classify health data in three tiers (identifiable, de-identified, aggregate) with a sharing rule for each. Set a minimum security standard for every facility holding electronic records: encryption, individual logins, role-based access, audit logs. Aim to bring all regional and teaching hospitals into compliance.

Adopt a pathogen-sharing framework: samples leave only under a material transfer agreement guaranteeing Ghanaian co-authorship, local access to results and a share of any product developed.

Make breach reporting mandatory within a fixed deadline, and publish an annual breach count.

Within 24 months
Host national health data on infrastructure under Ghanaian jurisdiction, with locally held encryption keys. Introduce unified patient identifiers and clean up duplicate records.

Train at least one health data and security officer per region. Fund all of it from a protected line in the health budget, set as a percentage of health spending rather than left to donors.

Funding the principle
Sovereignty without money is a slogan. Data protection belongs inside the Accra Reset agenda, and the same logic applies: build capacity at home, then negotiate as an equal. Partners who want data access can fund the infrastructure that makes safe sharing possible, on Ghana’s terms.
The bottom line
Cabinet made a defensible call: patient records should not be a condition of aid. The harder part comes next. Ghanaians should be able to ask three questions of their health system and get plain answers.

Who can see my record? Who has seen it? What happens if it leaks? Until the system can answer all three, the refusal is a promise, not a protection.
Sources consulted
GBC Ghana Online, “Mahama: Cabinet rejected US health compact over pathogen data, medical records demands”

MyJoyOnline, “Ghana’s Cabinet rejected health deal with US, Mahama says” (September 2026)
Pulse Ghana, “Mahama explains why Ghana rejected US health deal” (September 28, 2026)
West Africa Weekly, “Nigeria and Uganda signed US health deals…” (citing Human Rights Watch)
Ghana Business News, “Beyond the sovereign ‘No'” (September 30, 2026)
KFF tracker of US bilateral health agreements, as cited in press reports

Law-enforcement and investigative agencies have an obligation to investigate allegations of economic and organised crimes, and this responsibility needs to be exercised with due diligence to ensure that the rights of every individual brought before them are upheld.

There is therefore a need to understand the circumstances surrounding the detention, including the basis and whether any criminal allegations are being investigated and to what extent, as well as any judicially mandated legal procedures to which he has been subjected if any.

These are important questions in a constitutional democracy where it is normal for such allegations to be made by members of civil society who are committed to the rule of law and who seek to hold state officials and agencies to account for their actions.

There are concerns as well that the New Patriotic Party (NPP) as an opposition party has the right and responsibility to exercise its freedom of expression and critique government policy, as well as to question the actions of government agencies, without being subject to intimidation, obstruction, or harassment by the state.

At the same time, the allegations of intimidation should be based on substantiated evidence, not assertions, and if the authorities are convinced that the detention of Lawyer Awueh is not related to any authorised investigation into economic and organised crime, they should state so and allow the due legal processes to take their course.

Ghana’s democratic governance system and institutions are strong enough to withstand political criticisms and unfounded allegations and to allow for evidence-based responses thereto.

The NPP and other political parties should therefore continue to exercise their freedom of expression, including the right to question government policies and programmes, but must do so through legal and verifiable evidence if they seek to avoid having their criticisms dismissed as political grandstanding.

Similarly, law-enforcement agencies must demonstrate openness and transparency in their investigations and provide objective and verifiable evidence of economic and organised crime if they wish to avoid accusations of political interference and overreach.

No political party can expect to receive immunity from investigation, and no citizen should feel that they can evade the due process of the law merely because they belong to a political party.

The situation with respect to Lawyer Awueh should therefore be resolved in a manner that safeguards and upholds Ghana’s rule of law and democratic values and institutions.

If there are allegations against him, they should be proven and brought to justice through the appropriate formal legal channels, but if there are no allegations, the law of the land should be upheld.

Ghana’s democratic governance system and institutions must reflect its status as a democratic and responsible republic that fosters trust and confidence among all citizens and political parties.

Regardless of their oppositional stance towards each other, and the appropriate response to allegations of either economic and organised crime or political grandstanding is for the institutions of state to exercise due diligence and due process in respect of any allegations.

This is the standard that Ghana’s democracy deserves.

Whenever a major fire breaks out, the Ghana National Fire Service (GNFS) is often the first institution placed under public scrutiny. The expectation is simple: firefighters arrive, deploy their tenders, and within minutes the fire should be extinguished.

But is firefighting really that simple?

Perhaps it is time we asked ourselves what we are expecting the Ghana National Fire Service to achieve with the resources available to it.

The GNFS itself identifies adequate resources, equipment, and appliances as essential to its ability to protect lives and property.

Its mandate goes beyond simply arriving at the scene of a fire. The service is responsible for fire prevention, public education, emergency response, rescue, and fire suppression.

Yet, when we look at some of the realities confronting firefighters on the ground, the picture becomes more complicated.

At Avenor, reports indicated that firefighters faced difficulties accessing some of the affected areas because of obstructed roads and structures. The GNFS reportedly had to clear structures to create access for its equipment.

So, when a fire tender cannot get close enough to the fire, what exactly do we expect the firefighter to do?

Fly?

The tender cannot fly.

This is where the conversation must move beyond the familiar question: “What is the work of the Fire Service in this country?”

We must also ask ourselves what role we, as citizens, play in creating the conditions under which firefighters have to operate.

We construct structures on or around spaces meant to provide access for emergency services. We block roads and passages. We build in areas that were not designed for habitation. We sometimes ignore fire-safety requirements until disaster strikes.

At Avenor, for instance, reports from the scene indicated that structures obstructed firefighters’ access. A company official also said the facility’s fire hydrants were empty.

When hydrants are inaccessible or unavailable, where exactly do we expect firefighters to obtain the water needed to fight a raging blaze?

From the sea?

Of course not.

This is why fire safety cannot be the responsibility of the Fire Service alone. It is a shared responsibility involving government, local authorities, property owners, businesses, communities, and individual citizens.

The Interior Ministry has itself described fire safety as a shared responsibility and has urged Ghanaians and institutions to comply with fire-safety laws.

Retooling cannot be an afterthought.

There is also a legitimate conversation to be had about the equipment available to the Ghana National Fire Service.

In June 2025, the government acknowledged the need to replace ageing and broken-down fire vehicles and announced plans to acquire new fire tenders.

The 2026 budget subsequently provided for the procurement of 100 fire tenders and assorted fire equipment, with GH¢150 million allocated for the retooling of the Fire Service.

In May 2026, Interior Minister Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka also said processes were far advanced for the procurement of the 100 fire engines and other rescue equipment.

These developments are important, but the real test will be whether the equipment reaches the Service, is distributed according to operational needs, is properly maintained, and is available when emergencies occur.

Retooling the Fire Service should not be treated as a political talking point. It is an investment in lives, property and national infrastructure.

And it must go beyond fire tenders.

We need accessible hydrants and reliable water sources. We need emergency routes that remain clear. We need appropriate equipment for industrial fires, high-rise buildings and other complex emergencies. We need proper protective equipment, communication systems and continuous training.

Firefighters cannot perform magic

Perhaps the biggest change we need is a change in mindset.

When a firefighter arrives at a scene, we should not automatically assume that the fire will be extinguished simply because the GNFS has arrived.

Firefighters work under extremely dangerous conditions. They enter burning structures, confront intense heat and smoke, rescue people and animals, protect surrounding properties and, in many instances, put their own lives at risk.

The Avenor incident is a reminder that their job is not magic.

If roads are blocked, the tender cannot pass.

If hydrants are inaccessible or empty, water becomes a challenge.

If structures are built in ways that restrict emergency access, firefighters are forced to work under even more difficult conditions.

And if equipment is inadequate for the scale or nature of a particular fire, the limitations become even more obvious.

This does not mean the Fire Service should not be questioned. Institutions entrusted with public safety must be held accountable.

But accountability must be informed by reality.

If we want a Fire Service capable of responding to major fires effectively, then we must demand that government equips it properly. At the same time, we must demand that assemblies enforce planning and building regulations, that property owners comply with fire-safety requirements, and that citizens stop creating obstacles that emergency responders have to overcome.

The current leadership of the GNFS, under Chief Fire Officer Daniella Mawusi Ntow Sarpong, has also been pursuing reforms aimed at improving the Service. The introduction of the Automated Fire Safety Compliance System (AFCAS), for example, is intended to modernise fire-safety inspections and compliance.

But leadership alone cannot solve every problem.

Government must provide the resources.

The Service must maintain and deploy them effectively.

Local authorities must enforce planning and safety regulations.

Businesses and property owners must comply.

And citizens must understand that fire prevention is not somebody else’s responsibility.

So, the next time a major fire breaks out and we are tempted to ask, “What is the work of the Fire Service?”, perhaps we should pause and ask another question:

What have we done as a country to give our firefighters the tools, access and conditions they need to do their work?

Because if we cannot collectively advocate for a properly equipped Ghana National Fire Service, while simultaneously contributing to the very challenges that make firefighting difficult, then our outrage after every major fire risks becoming nothing more than a cycle.

We cannot demand miracles from firefighters while denying them the conditions required to perform their duty.

Equip the Fire Service. Keep emergency routes open. Protect our hydrants. Enforce fire-safety laws. Educate the public. And take fire prevention seriously.

For years, Chairman Wontumi was one of those political figures whose voice seemed capable of shaking Kumasi before an earthquake could even clear its throat. He was everywhere on radio, at rallies, in political conversations, and in the imagination of loyalists. His name could produce applause in one room and nervous silence in another.

Then came the gavel.

And suddenly, Ghana discovered something politicians occasionally forget: the microphone has an off button.

The law has spoken, and the legal process continues through the avenues available to an accused or convicted person. But whatever happens in the appellate courts, there is already a lesson worth extracting from this episode.

Power is temporary. Character is permanent.

The most amusing thing about political power is how quickly everybody remembers that they were never really close to you.

When you are powerful, your phone battery is always busy. People call to check whether you have eaten. They call to ask whether you slept well. They call because they suddenly remembered an old school friendship dating back to 1998.

You become “Chairman,” “Boss,” “Oga,” “Our Leader,” “Our Messiah,” and occasionally, if the sycophant is sufficiently ambitious, “the greatest political strategist Ghana has ever produced.”

But let the political weather change.

Suddenly, the same people develop excellent network problems.

Calls do not connect.

Messages remain unread.

Photographs disappear from WhatsApp status.

And yesterday’s “my Chairman” becomes today’s “the former Chairman.”

Vanity upon vanity.

This is where the word sycophant becomes useful. Hon.  Fifi Kwetey has used the term in Ghana’s political vocabulary, and perhaps no word better describes the strange species that flourishes around power: the professional praise singer.

The praise singer does not tell you what you need to hear.

He tells you what keeps him close to the chair.

If you say the sky is blue, he says it is blue because you personally negotiated with heaven.

If you make a mistake, he calls it strategy.

If you lose an argument, he calls it political maturity.

If everybody else sees danger, he sees “an opportunity for greater leadership.”

And when the throne disappears?

He discovers another throne.

That is the tragedy of political worship. Some people do not love the politician. They love access to the politician.

So when the politician falls, the worshippers do not fall with him. They simply relocate.

Perhaps that is the hardest lesson for anyone who occupies public office: never confuse applause with loyalty.

Crowds are temporary tenants. Positions expire. Titles change. Governments change.

Party executives change.

Even the most powerful political machines eventually require spare parts.

But the law remains.

The river also remains.

The land remains.

And the consequences of decisions can outlive the political careers of those who made them.

Nobody should celebrate another person’s misfortune. Learn from it. Equally, nobody should behave as though power provides immunity from accountability. The principle is simple enough for a schoolchild: no one is above the law.

The real tragedy would be if Ghana learned nothing.

Today it may be Wontumi. Tomorrow it could be somebody else.

The lesson therefore should not be about one man alone. It should be about all of us who participate in public life.

Be measured.

Be humble.

Listen to people who can tell you “No.”

Keep friends who can correct you before the court corrects you.

And, above all, beware of the man who claps the loudest whenever you make a mistake.

He may not be your loyalist. He may simply be protecting his chair beside yours.

In politics, the music can be very loud when you are dancing.

But when the music stops, you discover who was dancing with you and who was merely dancing near you.

Vanity upon vanity.

Today you are on top of the mountain. Tomorrow, you may be explaining to somebody how you got there. And somewhere between the applause and the silence lies the oldest lesson of power:

Rise with humility. Act with restraint. Remember the law.

Because the praise singers may forget you.

The party may replace you. The crowd may move on.

But history has a remarkably long memory.

I will end with this final thought: “And water, unlike politicians, does not forget.” — Sylvester Nti

The moment a political party confuses the pursuit of power with the purpose of leadership, it begins to lose its way.

Power is not the destination. It is only the instrument. The deeper question is what that power is intended to achieve for the people.

That is why the conversation about the NDC after John Mahama must not begin with personalities. It must begin with the kind of leadership Ghana will require in its next phase of development.

Leadership, in the context of the National Democratic Congress, has never been a matter of mere succession.

It is about the delicate balance between continuity and renewal, about the ability to hold together a broad coalition while responding to the evolving aspirations of Ghanaians.

As John Mahama continues his current term, the party must already look beyond him, not with haste, but with sober reflection on the kind of leadership that will best serve both the NDC and Ghana in the years ahead.

Continuity without Imitation
John Mahama’s presidency will leave behind both achievements and unfinished business.

The next leader cannot approach the future as if everything before them was wrong. But neither should the future be imprisoned by the past.

A successor who merely imitates Mahama’s rhetoric or style will struggle to convince Ghanaians that a new chapter has begun.

One who rejects Mahama outright risks alienating the very tradition that delivered victory in 2024.

The wiser path is this: preserve what works, correct what does not, and renew what must change. That is the difference between succession and succession planning.

Economic Competence Is Non-Negotiable
Ghanaian politics is judged, above all, by the economy. Jobs. The cost of living. Public finances. Investment. Productivity. Industrialisation.

The future of young people. These are not abstract policy questions. They are everyday realities in homes and workplaces.

The next flagbearer must therefore be more than a skilled communicator. They must be someone who understands economic policy, can translate it into implementation, and explain difficult choices honestly. Charisma matters.

Organisation matters. But none of these can permanently compensate for weak economic grounding.

National Leadership Must Be Truly National
A leader cannot simply be nationally known; they must be national in outlook. That means listening across regions, generations, professions, and social groups.

It means recognising that Accra is not Ghana, that the aspirations of youth differ from those of older generations, and that the concerns of a farmer may not be the same as those of an entrepreneur.

National leadership requires social breadth, the ability to make even those who did not initially support you feel part of the national conversation.

Institutions Over Personality
Personalities come and go. Institutions remain. The next leader must respect constitutional processes even when inconvenient, build systems rather than rely on personal loyalty, and strengthen organisations without making themselves indispensable to them.

A country is governed well not because a leader is powerful, but because institutions remain credible and accountable even when leaders change.

The Ability to Unite After Competition

Ambition is natural in politics. The challenge is what happens after the contest. Can those who lose accept the outcome?

Can those who win make room for those who contested them? Can competitors return to a common purpose once the votes are counted?

The next flagbearer must demonstrate not only the ability to mobilise before a contest but also the maturity to reconcile after it.

Engaging the Youth Without Patronising Them
Age alone is not the issue. The deeper question is whether the leader understands the changing aspirations of younger Ghanaians, unemployment, digital culture, migration, new forms of enterprise, artificial intelligence, and shifting expectations about authority.

A leader does not have to be young to understand this generation, but they must be willing to listen without lecturing.

Campaigning Is Not Governing
A compelling speech can win applause. A campaign can build enthusiasm. But governance requires something else entirely: Policy → Budget → Institution → Implementation → Monitoring → Results.

Executive experience, administrative competence, and the ability to manage institutions must therefore weigh heavily in evaluating future leadership.

Integrity and Restraint
Public life rewards visibility, but constant visibility is not always leadership. Sometimes the most credible leader is the one who knows when to speak, when to listen, when to negotiate, and when to allow institutions to do their work.

Ethical credibility is accumulated slowly and lost quickly. A reputation for fairness, honesty, accountability, and respect for others may not produce immediate excitement, but it can become one of a leader’s greatest assets.

The Real Test
The NDC’s future should not be reduced to succession by personality. It should be about succession by vision, competence, character, and capacity to serve.
The deeper questions are these:

• Can this person unite the party after competition?
• Can this person manage a difficult economy?
• Can this person respect institutions?
• Can this person turn ideas into results?
• Can this person speak to the whole country?
• Can this person engage the young without patronising them?
• Can this person combine experience with renewal?
• Can this person exercise power without being consumed by it?

And most importantly: Can this person make the NDC’s next chapter larger than the personality of the person who leads it?
That, ultimately, is the leadership test.

There would have been giant billboards competing for attention across the major cities. Convoys would have announced the arrival of candidates.

Affluence would have been displayed with little restraint, while campaign investments would have transformed the media landscape into a battlefield of competing messages, endorsements and counter-endorsements.

And, perhaps most predictably, the political temperature within the elephant family would have been considerably hotter.

But the NPP is no longer in government.

And that simple political reality appears to have rewritten the party’s campaign playbook.

With the campaign officially drawing to a close on Friday ahead of Saturday’s national executive elections, the contest has, by comparison, been remarkably restrained.

The insults, accusations, political tantrums and verbal missiles that often accompany high-stakes intra-party contests have been relatively muted.

There have been exceptions.

Supporters of John Boadu and Paul Afoko have exchanged occasional jibes, while supporters associated with Boakye Agyarko have also entered the verbal fray. But these skirmishes have hardly produced the political fireworks that many would have expected from a contest involving the leadership of one of Ghana’s two major political parties.

This is not necessarily because the contenders have suddenly become less ambitious.

It may have more to do with the political environment in which they are campaigning.

Opposition changes the calculus.

The NPP is preparing to elect a new national leadership at a moment when the party’s immediate political task is fundamentally different from what it would have been had it retained power.

The new officers will inherit the responsibility of rebuilding, reorganizing and repositioning the party as an opposition force ahead of future electoral contests.

That reality appears to have shifted the emphasis from extravagant campaigning to organizational credibility, grassroots mobilization, party unity and the ability to work with delegates across the country.

Political scientist Maurice Duverger famously observed that in a competitive party system, opposition has a critical role as a mechanism of criticism and scrutiny. His description of opposition as a force that can provide “precious elements of appreciation” for government captures one important dimension of the political relationship between governing and opposition parties. s

For the NPP, however, opposition is no longer simply a constitutional position.

It has become the environment in which its internal political calculations are being made.

THE BILLBOARDS ARE QUIETER. THE POLITICS IS NOT

The relative absence of extravagant campaign displays should not be mistaken for an absence of intense competition.

Politics rarely disappears.

It simply changes form.

The four-way National Chairmanship contest involving former General Secretary John Boadu, Sammy Crabbe, former National Chairman Paul Afoko and former Energy Minister Boakye Agyarko remains one of the most closely watched contests of the elections. Boadu occupies position one on the ballot, followed by Crabbe, Afoko and Agyarko.

The real contest, therefore, may not be taking place on billboards.

It may be taking place quietly in telephone calls, meetings, regional networks, personal relationships, constituency structures and conversations with delegates.

That is where the election could ultimately be decided.

And that is precisely why predicting the outcome of the chairmanship race is an exercise in political uncertainty.

I will not attempt to predict who will win.

The chairmanship contest is one of those internal party elections that can confound conventional political calculations. Delegate decisions can change in the final hours. Personal loyalties can collide with regional considerations. Long-standing alliances can shift. A candidate’s performance, message or perceived momentum at the venue itself can alter calculations.

Even the most carefully constructed bloc may not remain a bloc when individual delegates enter the voting booth.

WHEN BLOCS MEET INDIVIDUAL CHOICE

I have conducted unstructured telephone interviews with delegates from the sixteen regions.

One observation stands out: delegates do not necessarily see themselves as prisoners of decisions supposedly taken at constituency or regional levels.

They have minds of their own.

This is important.

Political parties may operate through structures, but elections are ultimately conducted through individual acts of political choice.

The assumption that delegates will automatically vote according to a predetermined constituency, regional or factional instruction may therefore underestimate the complexity of internal party elections.

As political scientist Robert Michels argued in his famous analysis of political organizations, parties inevitably develop leadership structures and organizational hierarchies. His “iron law of oligarchy” remains one of the classic propositions in the study of party organization.

But the NPP’s current contest also demonstrates the other side of the equation: organizational structures can influence political behavior without completely eliminating individual agency.

Delegates listen.

They calculate.

They negotiate.

And sometimes, they change their minds.

THE REGIONAL BALANCE QUESTION

Another factor that should not be underestimated is regional balance.

The NPP has historically paid considerable attention to geographical representation in its leadership arrangements. That consideration could again feature in the thinking of delegates as they choose the individuals who will lead the party through its next phase.

This is not necessarily a formal voting formula.

Rather, it is part of the political culture and internal arithmetic of a national party that must maintain connections across Ghana’s diverse regions and constituencies.

The question facing delegates is therefore bigger than who has the loudest campaign machinery.

It is also about who can assemble a leadership team that appears sufficiently representative, inclusive and capable of holding together a party preparing for another national electoral battle.

FROM GOVERNMENTAL POWER TO ORGANISATIONAL POWER

Perhaps the most significant transformation in this year’s contest is the changing meaning of political power.

When a party is in government, access to state power inevitably forms part of the broader political environment within which its internal contests occur.

In opposition, the emphasis changes.

The party must depend much more heavily on its organization, activists, communicators, financiers, grassroots structures and ability to maintain political relevance outside government.

That may explain why this NPP contest has produced less of the conspicuous political theatre associated with previous campaigns.

The party has a different problem to solve.

It is not merely choosing officers.

It is choosing the political managers who will be expected to help rebuild an opposition machine capable of competing nationally.

The NPP says its October 3 elections will produce the national officers who will steer the affairs of the party into its next phase. Current arrangements cover the chairmanship, vice-chairmanship, general secretary ship, organizing, youth, women’s, Nasara, treasury and communications positions.

THE QUIET CAMPAIGN MAY BE THE REAL STORY

There is an irony here.

The quieter the campaign has become, the more consequential the individual delegate may become.

When campaigns are dominated by massive advertising, celebrity endorsements and public political theatre, the ordinary delegate can sometimes disappear beneath the noise.

This time, the noise has been comparatively subdued.

That could make the private conversation more important.

The telephone calls.

The constituency meeting.

The regional relationship.

The personal appeal.

The promise of inclusion.

The question of who can unite competing interests.

The calculation of who can rebuild the party.

And, ultimately, the moment when the delegate stands alone with the ballot paper.

That is where campaign rhetoric ends and political choice begins.

THE ELEPHANT’S NEW POLITICAL REALITY

The NPP’s October 3 national executive elections may therefore be remembered not simply for who wins the various positions, but for how differently the party campaigned while in opposition.

The giant billboards may be fewer.

The political invectives may be quieter.

The display of financial muscle may be less conspicuous.

But beneath the surface, the competition remains intense.

Forty-seven aspirants were vetted for the national executive elections, according to reports, while Dennis Miracles Aboagye is the sole candidate for the National Communications Director position.

That alone tells the story of a party whose internal democracy remains fiercely competitive.

The difference is that opposition appears to have forced the competition into a different register.

Less spectacle.

More organization.

Less public confrontation.

More delegate engagement.

Less display of governmental proximity.

More attention to the grassroots.

Perhaps that is the real meaning of the NPP’s new campaign playbook.

When political power is lost, political parties do not stop campaigning. They simply learn to campaign differently.

And on Saturday, October 3, at the Baba Yara Sports Stadium in Kumasi, more than campaign slogans will be tested.

The NPP’s organizational instincts, regional calculations, delegate loyalties and individual choices will all converge at the ballot box.

The elephant is no longer campaigning from the comfort of government.

It is campaigning from opposition.

And opposition, it appears, has changed the way the elephant campaigns.

Examples can be made of the Ghana Police Service, the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), the Narcotics Control Commission (NACOC), and the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP), among others.

Therefore, for the purpose of this article, “police” or “police officer” should be construed to include all other persons with the power to arrest.

Arrest Generally

Every person in Ghana, citizen or otherwise, law enforcement personnel or not, has the right to prevent the commission of a crime.

That can be done by arresting a person who is either committing a crime or is reasonably suspected to have committed a crime. This is provided under Section 12 of the Criminal and Other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30).

The said provision empowers every person in Ghana to arrest without a warrant.

However, the said arrest can only be effected by a private person if the offence is committed in his presence and involves use of force/violence, bodily harm to another person, stealing/fraud, or injury to public property or property in the lawful care/custody of the arresting person.

That said, the private person who arrests another person, is required to hand him over to a police officer or take him to the nearest police station.

Arrest by Security/Intelligence Officer

Police, EOCO, NACOC, OSP officers et al, generally have the power to arrest with or without a warrant.

The default position regarding arrest without a warrant is to do so to prevent the commission of a crime or to prevent the escape of a suspect. Section 10 of Act 30 specifies instances where a police officer can arrest a person without a warrant.

The said section can be said to be a rendition of Section 24(2) and (4) of the United Kingdom’s Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 which states as follows:

Section 24(2) “If a constable has reasonable grounds for suspecting that an offence has been committed, he may arrest without a warrant anyone whom he has reasonable grounds to suspect of being guilty of it.

(4) But the power of summary arrest conferred by subsection (2) is exercisable only if the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that for any of the reasons mentioned in subsection (5) it is necessary to arrest the person in question.”

It is important to mention that a police officer does not have the power to arrest a person without a warrant if the reason for the arrest does not fall within that provided under Section 10 of Act 30.

This position was set out in Asante v. The Republic [1972] 2 GLR 177 where the court held that a police officer effecting an arrest without a warrant (under Section 10(a) of Act 30) must inform the person arrested of the cause for arrest, unless the arrest occurs during the commission of an offence or immediately after escape from custody.

My stance is fortified by the legal maxim ‘expressio unius est exclusio alterius,’ to wit ‘the express mention of a thing excludes the other.’

Similar provisions of Section 10 of Act 30 can be found in the acts that created other intelligence/security institutions or agencies with investigative and prosecutorial powers.

For expedient action, a law enforcement officer is not reasonably expected to procure an arrest warrant before effecting an arrest.

However, the proper procedure required of every law-enforcing officer is to procure an arrest warrant before proceeding to arrest a person who does not fall within Section 10 of Act 30.

Stated differently, where a police officer is investigating a matter and a person of interest in needed to assist in investigations, provided that the said person does not fall under the provisions of Section 10 of Act 30, an arrest warrant is required before an arrest can be effected.

It is not a fluke that sections of Act 30 have been arranged chronologically whereby arrest without a warrant comes after arrest with a warrant.

The reading of provisions under ‘Arrest Generally’ makes it abundantly clear that a police officer first needs to consider procuring a warrant of arrest where necessary. It is rather unfortunate that our men and women in uniform have rather elevated the exception to the norm.

Frequent Arrests without a Warrant

I have heard colleagues argue that the police have the discretion to arrest with or without a warrant. My response to that argument is twofold:

1. Article 296(a) and (b) of the Constitution 1992 of Ghana mandates them to act fairly and candidly without being arbitrary, capricious or bias; and
2. That discretion has been taken away by Section 10 of Act 30, in that they can only arrest without a warrant if any of the conditions listed therein exist.

Considering the reasons proffered immediately supra, I wish to state that the police or any other security/intelligence officer does not have the authority to arrest a person at will.

Except where the arrest is justified by the dictates of Section 10 of Act 30, any other instance of arrest requires an arrest warrant.

Our courts have, ad nauseam, made it abundantly clear that arresting a person without a warrant is wrong if the reason for the arrest does not constitute a criminal offence.

In Ampofo v. The State [1967] GLR 155-167, the court held that a police officer cannot effect an arrest without a warrant for conduct that merely offends the officer’s personal sensibilities but does not constitute a statutory or common law criminal offence; the power to arrest is strictly limited to offences recognized by law.

Also, in the case of Miller v. Attorney-General [1975] 2GLR 31, it was held that a police officer who effects an arrest must have reasonable grounds for suspicion at the actual time of arrest.

Arrest verses Invitation

As has been explained supra, a police officer who seeks to use arrest to procure the attendance of a suspect or person in a matter under investigation needs to do so with the use of a warrant.

The exception to the rule is where the offence was committed in the presence of the officer or the officer has reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence has been committed.

That aside, a police officer can invite a person of interest to appear before him to assist in investigations.

Where the invitation is not honoured, the reasonable remedy available to the officer is to apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for an arrest warrant to be issued.

The norm whereby the police proceed to arrest persons of interest who fail to honor their invitation is wrong and needs to be condemned.

Conclusion

Persons with the power to arrest should refrain from abusing the power they possess. Individuals whose rights are abused either by unlawful or unjustified arrest should consider seeking redress in a court of competent jurisdiction.

Only when individuals enforce their fundamental human rights for personal liberty as enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution 1992 of Ghana would our democracy thrive.

God bless our homeland, Ghana, and make us great and strong.

The writer is a Legal Practitioner whose email address is peprah.berko@yahoo.com

Where there is genuine doubt about their identity, ask to report with them to the nearest police station or other law enforcement office. Alert family or trusted persons. Have someone accompany you where practicable. Call your lawyer. Do not physically obstruct genuine officers effecting a lawful arrest. But being law-abiding does not mean blindly surrendering yourself to unidentified people simply because they claim the power to arrest you.

Check Article 14 of the 1992 Constitution and section 10 thereof of the Criminal and Other Offences Procedure Act. There are clear rules on what you are entitled to when someone is about to arrest you and what amounts to a lawful arrest and what amounts to an arrest that you are entitled in law to resist, which the court has vindicated. A lawful arrest by genuine law enforcement officers ought to be distinguishable from an abduction.

Now, I have received good feedback from respected people, including at the seat of government. They tell me many in the Newsfile audience believe I should not descend into the gutter with a man whose stock in trade is insults and manufactured stories. You are right and may want me or not want me to do what I am about to do, because you are not the class of audience to waste your precious time on gossip about people and their looks, their health, or their family being subjected to insults.

But one thing you deserve is answers to false allegations about me. The issues. I also have enormous respect for President John Dramani Mahama, who himself has publicly denounced the ugly subculture of insults and abuse that is increasingly poisoning our online public discourse. And the irony is not lost on me at all.

I have spent practically the whole of this week at a residential workshop training several dozen media hosts, editors and managers in media law, accuracy, verification, ethics, defamation and responsible journalism. I should therefore be the last person to leave that classroom and come here to practise the very conduct I have been teaching journalists to avoid. So I won’t. But silence should also not become evidence manufactured in support of a lie.

So for the last time, yes, for the last time, let me put a few things on record about Kelvin Taylor. I hardly mention his name. Many respectable people I know don’t either because they do not wish to participate in a social media culture when notoriety is gained through personal abuse and false allegations.

For about a decade, he has repeated a juvenile story about my breath. Even if I suffered from halitosis, which I do not, I’m struggling to discover its relevance to any matter of public interest on which I have spoken. But that is the very least of my concern.

He has manufactured stories about my family, my professional life and my supposed political connections. They are not differences of opinion. They are false, total falsehoods. He has invented stories about the life my wife and I supposedly lived in Kumasi or later in Accra. And even if I came from the poorest home in Ghana, what exactly would be the shame in that? I remain profoundly grateful for the modest successes God has blessed my family and me with through decent hard work. Decent hard work. There is no dishonour in humble beginnings.

Then came his confident announcement that President Akufo-Addo had pencilled me down for appointment to the bench. He told his followers to watch it happen. Well, they watched. It didn’t happen. Did he retract the story? Did his followers demand the evidence on which he made it? No. The story has simply changed.

Now he tells them that Dr Mahamudu Bawumia has promised me a place on the bench if he wins the next elections. How convenient. When one prophecy fails, simply move its fulfilment into the future. That’s what he does.

I stated publicly many years ago that I had no interest in joining the bench. Not in politics, as in partisan politics. If I ever change my mind, I believe I am eminently qualified to seek judicial office or political office through the proper processes. I would not require a politician to procure it for me.

But the more important question is simple. Where is the evidence? When did Bawumia make that promise? Where? Nobody is told. Through whom? What is the source? No source. His followers apparently demand none. An allegation is made. It is swallowed. When events expose it, another version takes its place.

Then there is Egyapa. He confidently announced that I was a lawyer in the infamous Egyapa transaction. Again, completely false. Not one engagement letter. Not one legal opinion. Not one invoice. Not one meeting record. Not one document showing I acted as lawyer for Egyapa. Nothing.

Meanwhile, I moderated Newsfile discussions in which that transaction was subjected to sustained and sometimes severe criticism to the chagrin of the NPP. This is precisely why serious journalism insists upon verification. If you say a lawyer acted in a transaction, show the evidence. If you say a president selected somebody for judicial appointment, prove it. If you say another presidential candidate has promised him the same appointment, reduce your basis.

A microphone does not convert gossip into fact. Following a class of following does not convert fabrication into journalism. And repeating a falsehood for 10 years does not eventually make it true.

There is a reason I have generally refused to engage. I have a family whose dignity I respect. I have professional colleagues. I have clients who entrust serious matters to me and are entitled to expect judgment and restraint from their lawyer. I have younger lawyers and journalists who watch what I do. And I have spent years, decades, building platforms patronised by audiences who expect evidence, reason, and responsible disagreement.

I owe all of them, all of you, better than an insult fest. I will not do that.

But I have a word for my colleagues in the Ghanaian media. We cannot condemn misinformation, disinformation, defamation, and abusive broadcasting when they come from mainstream radio, television, and newspapers.

But suddenly lose our voices because the person doing it online may turn his insults and fabrications on us. That is how impunity grows. And it is precisely the culture President Mahama has rightly cautioned against.

Criticise me. Challenge my journalism. Attack my legal reasoning. Disagree with every opinion I express here. Show me where I got a fact wrong, and I will correct it. I do that.

And you know what he did this week? I mistakenly, by slip, used the elder Bafuboni for the younger Bafuboni who went to jail. I corrected it on this show. He clipped just the part without the correction and made a meal of it. That’s journalism? Really?

So, what I’m doing is accountability. But manufacturing stories about my wife, my family, my career, and my professional work is not accountability. It is not journalism. And discerning people can judge each of us by the record we leave behind.

I began this morning with a simple message about people claiming the authority of the state. Verify the badge. And I end with an equally simple message about those of us claiming the authority of the media. Verify the story. Ask for the evidence. Demand the proof.

And that is my take.

When I worked as an image consultant, almost everyone in the industry focused heavily on visuals. Rather than follow the crowd, I tapped into my strength in writing, and that choice brought me significant progress in my online visibility.

It’s a thin line and a slippery slope, though. A thin line because authenticity is not for its own sake but should generate results. It’s also a slippery slope because some may confuse authenticity with staying in the comfort zone, which would be dreadful.

Authenticity, to borrow the words of Dolly Parton, is finding who you are and doing it on purpose. Doing it on purpose connotes intentionality, but before you are intentional, you need awareness: an awareness of who you are.

What do you know about yourself for sure? Personally, that question has led me to my true identity.

We underestimate the power of authenticity in business. Look around, and you’ll see copy-and-paste everywhere. Copy-and-paste, however, can only get you so far. Businesses are chasing the same trend, the same offer, even the same content, ditto-ditto.

That’s what creates a red ocean: a market clustered with replicas, competing on price and noise because they all chased what they thought was working for the other business owner, not what would actually work for them.

They didn’t care to find out. Original thinking takes a deep dive into the blue ocean, the unexplored terrain, and you cannot think originally about your business while borrowing someone else’s identity.

Here are four ways authenticity plays a vital role for business owners:

1. It is a business matchmaker: Authenticity while running a business is important, but it’s worth considering even before venturing into any business. Is the type of business aligned with who you truly are? Does it align with your purpose and your core values?

Or is it because someone else is making money from it? Well, that does not mean you will succeed doing the same thing. As Adnan Saani, a Ghanaian entrepreneur, said, “For every business that someone has failed at, there is a person that has succeeded at it.” A lot of factors play a role in determining if a business will succeed or not. How the business aligns with the person running it is one of them, because what aligns with who you are fulfils you.

That fulfilment is what makes consistency possible, and consistency is one of the foundations of business success.

Running a transport business may seem lucrative, but for an aesthetically inclined person, a beauty-related business would be better suited. This really matters, but it is not discussed enough.

2. It acts as the differentiator: When business owners leverage their true identity, it becomes what sets them apart from everyone else in the same industry. This is even more critical now because people are increasingly drawn to personal brands, not just business brands.

This can be a key advantage in industries whose products and services are inherently identical. Take the human hair industry: the product isn’t noticeably different from one seller to the next.

There are no real markers of differentiation, unlike the car industry, for example, where models look fairly different. Leveraging identity, for instance, can mean building your personal brand as a founder around your purpose, values and strengths. Here, people are drawn to the business because of the personal brand behind it.

A classic example is Gwen Addo of Hair Senta, who built her hair business by leaning into her personality rather than fighting for attention on product alone.

She showed up and shared life lessons, and that’s what drew people in. She sold hair, but what she shared was true to her, and that became her edge.

3. It is the source of social media content: In this era of social media marketing, content creation is almost non-negotiable. Social media is an affordable and accessible medium for business promotion; however, just because everyone’s dancing with their products on TikTok doesn’t mean you should, if that does not align with who you are.

Some people dance for content, others teach, and some show their lifestyle along with their products and services. Content creation feels like a struggle when you haven’t yet tapped into what’s natural to you. The moment you do, it stops feeling like performance. You are able to keep showing up when what you’re doing as content feels authentic. You can consistently post dancing videos if that’s genuinely you. You can consistently share Bible verses if that’s genuinely you.

What you can’t do is consistently fake something that isn’t you; it dries up. When you create content from within yourself, you become more creative and interesting. What do you already do in your daily life? That should be the source of your content.

4. It is the guiding light for decision-making: When the business owner has a clear sense of purpose and direction, deciding what to do, and what not to do, gets easier. That ability is strategic power. That clear sense of purpose is derived from the founder’s identity: authenticity. It brings the clarity that propels intentionality and action. Not every piece of advice you are given as an entrepreneur needs to be followed.

Businesses lose their way by taking every suggestion instead of checking it against who they are. In this age of information overload, your authenticity becomes the filter for generic advice. The direction to go is within you, once you are making informed and intuitive choices.

Some of these pressures can look like being told to scale up your school to the elementary level when your core focus and competence lie in pre-school, or being advised to display some handbags in your make-up store just because sales seem slow. Businesses playing to win must play their best by staying focused.

You can run out of who to copy, but you cannot run out of who you are. It is an endless resource to tap into. AI, as the new gold rush, has created a thirst for originality and connection; entrepreneurs should capitalize on authenticity to provide that. Yet it is all too quickly becoming rare.

As markets become fiercely competitive with porous entry, and business capabilities continuously become replicable, founders who see that what remains truly not replicable is simply who they are are better poised to lead in their industries.

They are true to purpose, true to their values and aligned with their strengths. Entrepreneur, to thine own self be true.

Today, that tradition is under threat. Across our Senior High Schools, dormitories are increasingly dominated by imported Chinese plastic chop boxes, which now sell for GHC 600 to GHC 800, while the durable, locally-made wooden chop box costs only GHC 250 to GHC 400.

We are literally paying twice the price to destroy our own economy.

The Wooden Chop Box: A Ghanaian Value Chain

The wooden chop box is not just wood and nails. It represents a complete local economic ecosystem. Its production sustains the timber seller at Sokoban Wood Village, the master carpenter at Suame Magazine or Anloga, the painter who inscribes the student’s details, the welder who reinforces the locks, and most importantly, the young apprentice – often a JHS graduate – who is learning a productive trade.

When a parent buys one wooden chop box, that GHC 300 circulates within Ghana for months. It pays rent, school fees, and food for at least five Ghanaian families. It is strong, lasts for three to four years, can be easily repaired, repainted, and passed on to a younger sibling. It is fully biodegradable.

The Plastic Chop Box: An Imported Liability

The Chinese plastic alternative offers none of these benefits. It is manufactured in China, imported fully finished, and sold by large-scale importers. It creates zero jobs for Ghanaian artisans.

Every GHC 700 spent on a plastic box is capital flight – money that leaves Ghana instantly. It is fragile; it cracks on tiled floors, its plastic hinges snap, and its locks fail. Unlike wood, it cannot be repaired by the local welder. When it breaks, the entire GHC 800 investment is thrown into the bin, eventually becoming plastic waste that will choke our drains and landfills for centuries.

The Economic Impact in Numbers

Let us be realistic. With over 150,000 students placed in SHS 1 annually, if just 100,000 of them opt for a plastic chop box at an average price of GHC 700, Ghana loses GHC 70 million every single academic year to China – on chop boxes alone.

That same GHC 70 million could produce over 200,000 wooden chop boxes, sustain more than 10,000 carpenters and their apprentices throughout the season, and keep all that wealth circulating within our local economy. We are exporting jobs and importing unemployment.

A Call for Rethink: Heads, Teachers, GES and Government

1. To Heads of Senior High Schools and Teachers:
   Some school authorities, in the quest for uniformity and neatness in dormitories, are subtly encouraging – and in some cases directing students to buy – plastic boxes. This is contradictory. We cannot teach patriotism and “Buy Made in Ghana” in Social Studies and Business Management, while practically banning Made in Ghana products in our dormitories. School policies must explicitly state that wooden chop boxes are allowed and preferred.
2. To the Ghana Education Service (GES):
   GES must review its prospectus guidelines. The official national prospectus should read: “Chop Box – Wooden (Locally Manufactured Recommended).” GES is championing TVET and skills development. It is illogical to train carpenters in our technical and vocational institutions while simultaneously collapsing their primary market by importing what they can produce.
3. To the Government of Ghana:
   Practical intervention is needed:

• Regulate Imports: Impose a higher import duty on plastic trunks and chop boxes, and channel the revenue into supporting local carpenter cooperatives.
• Modernize Local Production: Through the Ghana Enterprises Agency, provide soft loans and modern equipment to carpenter associations to produce improved wooden boxes – with waterproof paint, stronger locks, and even wheels.
• Enforce Buy Ghana: The Buy Made in Ghana agenda must move beyond exhibition halls and start from our school dormitories. If we can protect poultry and rice farmers through import restrictions, we must also protect our carpenters.

Conclusion

The facts are stark:

Wooden Chop Box: GHC 250-400. Lasts 4 years. Repairable. Supports Ghanaian families. Eco-friendly.

Plastic Chop Box: GHC 600-800. Lasts 1 year. Irreparable. Supports Chinese factories. Pollutes the environment.

Rejecting the wooden chop box is not a sign of modernity; it is a sign of economic self-sabotage. We are paying more to become poorer.

To all SHS heads, teachers, GES officials, and policymakers – it is time to rethink. If we truly want to industrialize and create jobs, let us start with the simple choices. Let us start from the chop box.

Buy Wooden. Build Ghana. Save Money.

Every researcher needs data to carry out their study, so when there is a data drought on a subject of empirical investigation, it becomes a huge stumbling block to the researcher, possibly causing them to abandon their study or chart a new parallel path to the original idea.

It suffices to say, however, that the lack of data the researcher encountered sixteen years ago on a topic like insults in the media signaled something positive or healthy about the general environment for public discourse at the time.

This is despite it posing a serious threat to the attainment of a university degree.
Contrarily, when there is an overabundance of data on a topic like that, 16 years after the initial fruitless attempt, it is indisputable evidence of where society, specifically, public discourse, has shifted to.

Significantly, it is also indicative of a deteriorating and possibly ethically deficient society.

So, here is my question: must we be concerned about the rather glaringly ethically deficient status quo of our public discourse, or should we write it off as a normal concomitant of a liberal society, aka democracy?

A matter of grave concern
I’m not the first to write about this, and I definitely will not be the last. But I feel I must also make my attempt at a drop in the ocean. Surely, change can be realised when all hands are on deck.

Every little effort, every little attempt, every little … helps. It is no wonder the British supermarket chain, Tesco, popularized this phrase. Indeed, small efforts matter and are important in contributing to a bigger goal.

The bigger goal, this time, is sanity within our information and media environment.

Over the past weeks, the public sphere has been awash with conversations about how our society’s social fabric is degenerating, and I dare say, at a faster rate than ever, particularly when it comes to decent conversations, be it on politics or on social issues.

I say “faster rate” because now the platforms that accelerate public discourse, including who initiates/originates or sets the agenda, and who disseminates it, have been democratized, thanks to advances in digital technologies.

With generative technologies being able to imitate human intelligence and our ill tendencies, humans no longer need other humans to perpetrate wrongs against their kind.

The technologies have become our faithful and convenient allies, helping us to fabricate wild allegations, perpetrate lies, polish up insults, and execute wicked agendas against our own kind that we sometimes consider “the enemy” or the subject of our dislike and/or hatred. Sad.

When I see, watch, and hear the daily insults, hearsay, hate speech, threats, inciting comments and sharp vitriol accompanying social media posts and commentary, I cannot help but to attempt to contribute to turning the tide.

That is, if only the tide has not already washed away our humanity, respect, reverence, and the strength of character and ethical backbone that distinguishes Ghanaians from others without the tiniest crevices to hold on to.

We must fight the temptation at all costs
People always have something to say about someone: their looks, how they talk, what they do, what they do not do, how they wish ill on them, on and on and on.

Yes, as right-thinking humans, we may form opinions on issues, but it is not every opinion that must be uttered or shared with the world, even when you are convinced that it is the most persuasive or erudite.

There is a reason for the adage that “all truths are not to be told” or “all truth is good, but not all truth is good to say.” Should we all utter what we think of, know of, or how we feel about people or every issue, society would be sent into chaos.

Even worse is when made-up falsehoods permeate public discourse. That is why it is important that, in being wise, we must sometimes give our “thoughts no tongue.” as Polonius, the chief counselor to King Claudius, advised his son, Laertes, in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet.

Critical public discourse must be based on factual arguments and not insults and denigration of people’s persona, sometimes to the extent of stripping them of their dignity.

As a people who pride ourselves on being civilized, civilization in itself must tame our human nature by redefining our manners, developing our intellect, and, when need be, restraining us.

Civilization must advance society and must develop our culture and not erode it. That’s why it becomes a matter of grave concern when we witness some of the vilest insults come from people who are supposed to be an example in society, particularly to the younger generation.

Additionally, our tendency to politicize everything has worsened things. We have become enemies because of political biases. We perceive everything as black or white, forgetting the shades in the spectrum.

That is why every other person becomes the enemy, and the only way we seem to know how to deal with the enemy is to “destroy” them so our side of the divide will stand as the better side.

Because of politics, we have strangely redefined family, friendship, associate, colleague, etc. Of late, you are likely to see people showing respect only to the people that they share political affiliation with or whom they anticipate obtaining favour from.

Once you are of “no use” to them, you are a good candidate for needless castigation and character assassination. It seems to me that the easiest thing to do these days is destroying people’s reputations.

I also see that the extent of the harm increases when the act intended to create the destruction is generously bankrolled.

The attention economy as a facilitator of information disorder.

The other aspect of the conversation is how social media incentivizes sensationalism and exploits the negativity bias of the human tendency to pay closer attention to content that contains threats, causes anger and outrage.

And in the present attention economy built on clicks, shares, comments, and watch time, it is not surprising that those who want to attract the attention that translates into both online and offline monetary returns will do anything to push content that the algorithms are configured to track and promote.

So, next time you react to, comment on, and/or share that vitriol, remember that you are contributing to the ocean of information disorder within the media and information ecology.

If you are the one behind that account spewing insults, disrespect, and unnecessary attacks, note that civilization requires that we disagree with one another without losing respect, empathy, and civility for one another.

We must also have a sense of responsibility to lift others when they are in their darkest moments rather than verbally battering them to the point of ruin.

And rightly so, I find the quote that I recently came across, “to strike an adversary who is down is a betrayal of humanity, not a victory of strength”, incredibly poignant.

The more this goes on, factual information gets buried. And democratic decisions will be taken based on poor judgment.

And here is the reason: the algorithms will drown out factual and decent communication when there is a sea of the opposite.

This is not to argue that duty bearers shouldn’t be held accountable. Certainly, we must, but in a decorous manner, while keeping the facts at the centre.

Hate speech, threats, and inciting comments do not build a civil society; they quickly tear society apart, leaving us in chaos and dysfunction.

So, now my question: must we continue on this tangent, knowing the chaos on social media does not stay just on social media but fast trickles into homes, communities, institutions and society at large?

Until next time, when I meet you and take your responses, this is my drop in the ocean.

The writer is an associate professor of Media and Communication Studies at Durban University of Technology.

I have a particular interest in this question.

In 2021, I issued a writ at the Supreme Court for two lawyers, Hilda Mansuwa Kpentey Dongotey and Albert Gyamfi, challenging aspects of the parliamentary arrangement then governing the service of process and arrest of an MP. That constitutional action remains pending.

The present controversy requires us to separate four questions which are easily confused:

Does an MP have immunity from arrest? Must the Speaker first give permission before an MP can be arrested? Can an MP be arrested without a warrant? And even where there is a lawful power of arrest, was that power lawfully exercised in this particular case?

They are not the same questions.

WHAT DOES THE CONSTITUTION ACTUALLY SAY?

The starting point is Article 117 of the 1992 Constitution:

“Civil or criminal process coming from any court or place out of Parliament shall not be served on, or executed in relation to, the Speaker or a member or the Clerk to Parliament while he is on his way to, attending at or returning from, any proceedings of Parliament.”

Notice what the Constitution does not say.

It does not say that an MP cannot be arrested. It does not grant an MP immunity throughout the entire duration of a parliamentary meeting or session. It does not prevent an MP from being investigated. And it does not expressly say that the permission of the Speaker must first be obtained before the criminal law can operate against an MP.

The purpose of Article 117 is readily understandable: Parliament must be protected against interference with its proceedings. But protecting Parliament is one thing; converting membership of Parliament into personal immunity from the ordinary criminal law is another.

There is also Article 17. It declares that all persons are equal before the law and prohibits discrimination on grounds including social or economic status. Its definition of discrimination also addresses differential treatment by which privileges or advantages are granted to one class of persons but not another.

That does not cancel Article 117. Parliamentary privilege is itself constitutionally guaranteed. But Article 17 cautions against enlarging that limited protection, by practice or protocol, into a general immunity the Constitution did not grant.

The balance is simple: protect Parliament from interference, but do not protect parliamentarians from the ordinary law beyond what the Constitution actually provides.

THE QUESTION WE TOOK TO THE SUPREME COURT

This controversy did not begin with the Manhyia South MP.

It came dramatically into public view in 2021 when my friend, the Madina MP, Dr. Francis-Xavier Sosu, was sought by the Police following incidents associated with a demonstration he led in his constituency. He invoked parliamentary privilege, as other MPs have done before and since. Police attempted to arrest him in church. The NDC collectively resisted and decried it.  

I have always asked a fairly simple question.

Suppose an MP is genuinely driving to Parliament and, on the way, hits and kills somebody in circumstances amounting to an offence. Must a police officer who witnesses it allow him to continue because he says, “I am on my way to Parliament”?

Take an even clearer example. Suppose an MP is proceeding to Parliament carrying contraband and is caught red-handed. Or he assaults somebody while proceeding to parliamentary business.

Can Article 117 really mean that a police officer who catches the MP in flagrante delicto must say:

“You are an MP on your way to Parliament. I cannot arrest you until the Speaker permits me”?

That question goes to the heart of the pending constitutional action.

Among other reliefs, the plaintiffs ask the Supreme Court to determine whether, upon a true interpretation of Articles 117 and 118, an authorised officer or process server requires the leave or certificate of the Speaker to serve or execute civil or criminal process against an MP who is about his personal affairs or ordinarily engaged in activities in his constituency.

We also ask whether the constitutional expressions “attendance” and “proceedings of Parliament” can properly be stretched to encompass the entire duration of a parliamentary session or meeting.

The practical arrangement which existed under Speaker Professor Aaron Mike Oquaye treated the Speaker as having an important gatekeeping role before an MP could be arrested. The constitutional question is whether parliamentary practice can enlarge an immunity beyond what the Constitution itself grants.

That question remains before the Supreme Court.

SPEAKER BAGBIN HAS SINCE DRAWN AN IMPORTANT LINE

There has, however, been a significant development.

On 21st May, 2026, Speaker Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin rejected the proposition that security agencies require his permission before arresting or inviting an MP. His position was that the agency should notify the Speaker and provide the circumstances so that any applicable parliamentary privilege or immunity may be determined.

That distinction is crucial:

NOTIFICATION IS NOT PERMISSION.

The Speaker does not issue a licence for the criminal law to operate. Equally, an arrest cannot be used to defeat a privilege which the Constitution actually confers.

AN ARREST DOES NOT ALWAYS REQUIRE A WARRANT

There is another misconception exposed by this controversy: not every lawful arrest requires a warrant.

Section 10 of the Criminal and Other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) permits arrest without warrant in specified circumstances. These include where an offence is committed in the presence of a police officer and where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that a person has committed an offence.

And EOCO has police powers. Section 18 of the Economic and Organised Crime Office Act, 2010 (Act 804) clothes the Executive Director, Deputy Executive Directors and officers authorised by the Executive Director with the powers and immunities conferred on police officers under Act 30 and other applicable law.

The Office of the Special Prosecutor is similarly clothed with police powers under section 28 of Act 959.

So the mere response, “Show me the warrant,” does not determine whether an arrest is lawful.

But the absence of a requirement for a warrant does not create an unlimited power of arrest. There must still be lawful authority and lawful grounds for that particular arrest.

And that brings us to Manhyia South.

WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED BETWEEN EOCO AND BAFFOUR AWUAH?

EOCO says its officers attempted to arrest Baffour Awuah in connection with an ongoing investigation. It says he had twice been invited in February to assist with the investigation, did not honour those invitations, and that the attempted arrest was one of the lawful steps subsequently taken to secure his attendance.

We now have the correspondence.

EOCO’s first letter of 10th February, 2026, headed “Invitation Pursuant to Sec. 19 of Act 804/10,” was addressed to the Senior Partner of Sarkodie Baffour Awuah & Partners. It stated that EOCO was investigating alleged financial irregularities at SIC Life Savings & Loans Company Limited and considered the firm’s input important to the investigation.

But I have seen a second letter, and it materially clarifies the picture.

On 27th February, 2026, EOCO wrote expressly to:

“Nana Agyei Baffour Awuah
Senior Partner
Sarkodie Baffour Awuah And Partners.”

EOCO acknowledged that Baffour Awuah had informed it that, having become an MP, the earlier invitation had been referred to the Clerk of Parliament for advice. EOCO rejected the suggestion that this prevented his attendance and stated that it was unaware of any law or established protocol preventing him from honouring the invitation.

It then warned that failure to honour the invitation might leave EOCO with no choice but to “compel him to appear before the Office.”

So one point should be conceded immediately.

It would not be accurate to say that EOCO never specifically required Baffour Awuah himself to attend. It did.

The letter is interesting for another reason. EOCO was itself disputing, as far back as February, the proposition that the mere fact that Baffour Awuah had become an MP required its investigative invitation to be channelled through Parliament.

But that does not settle the legality of what happened seven months later.

It sharpens the real question.

WHEN DOES “COME AND ASSIST US” BECOME “YOU ARE UNDER ARREST”?

Both February letters were expressly issued pursuant to section 19 of Act 804.

They sought Baffour Awuah’s assistance with an investigation. The second warned that EOCO might “compel him to appear.”

But three things must not automatically be treated as synonymous:

INVITATION, COMPULSION TO ATTEND, ARREST.

An administrative letter cannot itself create a power to deprive a person of his liberty. That power must ultimately be found in law.

The critical question is therefore:

What provision of Act 804 or Act 30 authorised EOCO, seven months later, to convert Baffour Awuah’s failure personally to honour the section 19 invitation into a warrantless arrest?

There is another relevant fact. Material supplied by the MP indicates that Theresa Tabi, Managing Partner of Sarkodie Baffour Awuah & Partners, subsequently engaged EOCO, attending on 4^th March, 18^th March, and 30^th April, 2026, and ultimately providing a written statement.

The competing positions can therefore be stated fairly.

EOCO can say that Baffour Awuah himself did not personally honour its invitations. He can say that his law firm nevertheless subsequently cooperated with the investigation and supplied the information requested.

Neither fact, standing alone, answers whether the attempted arrest seven months later was lawful.

WHAT OFFENCE WAS HE BEING ARRESTED FOR?

This, for me, is now the critical question.

If EOCO relies upon section 10 of Act 30 because its officers had reasonable grounds to suspect Baffour Awuah of having committed an offence, then:

What offence? What were the reasonable grounds? And when did that suspicion arise?

The February correspondence, on its face, did not accuse Baffour Awuah of committing the alleged financial irregularities at SIC Life Savings & Loans. It sought his assistance with an investigation.

EOCO’s statement issued today similarly describes the attempted arrest as a step taken to secure his attendance after the invitations were not honoured.

There may be additional facts which EOCO has not publicly disclosed. Those could materially alter the legal analysis.

But on the presently available material, an important question remains:

What was the precise statutory basis for the arrest?

That is far more important than simply asking whether EOCO possessed a warrant.

THEN THERE IS THE MANNER OF THE ARREST

There is another issue entirely separate from parliamentary privilege.

Baffour Awuah says, as we see in the video, the woman in plain clothes approached him at the High Court claiming to be an EOCO officer; that she failed, when challenged, to produce satisfactory identification or proof of authority; and that although he offered to drive himself to EOCO, she insisted that he enter their vehicle.

EOCO subsequently confirmed that its officers were indeed attempting to arrest him.

That establishes their identity after the event. It does not completely answer the problem confronting a citizen at the moment persons in plain clothes attempt to take physical custody of him and place him in a vehicle.

Law enforcement must be capable of being distinguished from abduction.

That does not give anybody licence to violently resist a lawful arrest merely because the officer is not in uniform or because no warrant is produced. It means something more elementary: where plain-clothes officers seek to deprive a person of liberty, their identity and lawful authority matter.

And in EOCO’s particular case, section 18 of Act 804 makes the question of authority relevant: was the person purporting to exercise police powers an officer authorised to do so under the Act?

PARLIAMENT IS NOT A SANCTUARY

EOCO says Baffour Awuah subsequently proceeded to Parliament to seek “sanctuary”, although Parliament was on recess.

The parliamentary precincts are not a constitutional sanctuary from the criminal law. An MP cannot manufacture Article 117 immunity simply by driving into Parliament after law-enforcement officers approach him elsewhere.

But saying “Parliament is on recess” does not necessarily conclude the Article 117 inquiry either.

The Constitution speaks of a Member who is “on his way to, attending at or returning from, any proceedings of Parliament.” If there was an actual parliamentary proceeding, including qualifying committee business, and an MP was genuinely proceeding to it, that presents a question to be resolved on the facts and the proper interpretation of Article 117.

MY VERDICT

The principle should not be complicated.

Article 17 demands equality before the law and guards against discriminatory privilege. Article 117 protects the work of Parliament. Neither should be stretched to destroy the other.

An MP caught committing an offence cannot automatically convert “I am going to Parliament” into immunity from the criminal law.

Equally, there is a legitimate institutional concern about the other side of the equation. Warrantless arrest is an enormous power. If abused or deliberately timed to remove an MP when his presence is critical to parliamentary proceedings or a vote, a legitimate law-enforcement power could become an instrument for securing political advantage.

That is one concern on which the rival NDC and NPP MPs may readily find common cause, if only from the instinct of self-preservation. Governments change. Parliamentary majorities change. Those wielding State power today may sit on the opposite side tomorrow. The power used against an opponent today may be the power used against them tomorrow.

The Constitution must therefore guard against both abuses: MPs stretching a limited parliamentary privilege into personal immunity, and the State stretching lawful powers of arrest into a means of interfering with Parliament.

As for the immediate controversy, the 27^th February letter strengthens EOCO’s position that Baffour Awuah himself was required to attend and did not personally honour that invitation. But it does not by itself establish the legality of the attempted arrest seven months later.

The missing legal bridge remains important:

What transformed the section 19 invitation to assist an investigation into lawful authority for his arrest?

If EOCO was arresting him on reasonable suspicion that he had committed an offence, identify the offence and the grounds. If the purpose was simply to compel attendance because he had not honoured the invitation, identify the statutory power authorising arrest for that purpose.

And the broader constitutional question remains the one my clients placed before the Supreme Court:

How far does Article 117 protect the functioning of Parliament without becoming personal immunity from the ordinary criminal law?

The Court’s eventual answer should provide much-needed clarity.

The Constitution must protect Parliament without creating impunity for parliamentarians; and enforce the criminal law without giving the State a weapon for manipulating Parliament.

No Member of Parliament is above the law. And no law-enforcement agency is above the law governing its power of arrest.

That is THE LAW 101.

Join me on my weekly legal clinic, THE LAW, on the JoyNews Channel every Sunday @ 2:00 p.m., with a repeat broadcast on Monday at 11:00 a.m. THE LAW is your legal light and your help law.

That impression requires clarification.

The framework now being presented closely mirrors one introduced and applied during the second term of Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo by the then Minister for Finance.

Under that earlier arrangement, a special purpose vehicle (SPV) was established under the Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund (GIIF) to execute the Accra-Tema Motorway project.

This article is therefore not an argument against the Accra-Kumasi Expressway.

It is a call for an accurate public record and transparency on whether the current proposal is a continuation, duplication, or repackaging of a framework that already existed.

The public is entitled to know what has become of the original structure, why Accra-Tema Motorway Expressway Limited (ATEL) has not been used or properly acknowledged, and why the current administration is presenting the same basic financing concept as a new initiative.

During the second term of Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, the Ministry of Finance (MoF) worked with the Ministry of Roads and Highways (MoRH) to establish this framework for financing highway infrastructure. It took considerable effort for the MoF to bring the MoRH to the table.

Under the framework, ATEL was established as an SPV under GIIF. A board was constituted, and a Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Loius Harrison, was appointed. The relevant corporate records are available at the Registrar of Companies.

The MoRH awarded the motorway contract under this framework. The MoF also established a dedicated account at the Bank of Ghana (BoG), funded mainly through the Annual Budget Funding Amount (ABFA), which is derived from Ghana’s petroleum revenue. No external borrowing was used to finance the project, not even domestic borrowing.

ATEL was expected to execute the first phase of the motorway project and subsequently offload it to domestic pension funds. It would then raise a new set of domestic funds to execute further expressway projects across the country.

The purpose of this model was to minimise political interference in expressway construction and encourage domestic pension funds to regard such infrastructure projects as credible, long-term investments.

The motorway was expected to be tolled, with Parliament preparing to pass a new law once the road was completed. These discussions were already taking place publicly.

ATEL still has a sitting CEO, Loius Harrison, and the motorway project is being executed under the framework established under the NPP.

However, following the change in government and the assumption of office by a new Minister for Finance under the NDC, progress on the motorway project began to slow.

Against this background, the Accra-Kumasi Expressway is now being presented under a similar structure. A new CEO has been appointed, and the military was asked to clear the right of way. However, no board for the project has been publicly identified.

ATEL could have executed the Accra-Kumasi Expressway, particularly after gaining experience from the motorway project.

The decision to establish another structure therefore raises questions about institutional continuity, public accountability and the proper use of existing arrangements.

More significantly, a toll has reportedly already been announced for the Accra-Kumasi Expressway without parliamentary approval. The toll is reportedly estimated at US$20, even though the contract has yet to be awarded.

The Minister for Finance and his team have also announced that dedicated funds have been placed at the BoG for the Accra-Kumasi Expressway, as if this were the first time such a financing arrangement had been developed.

They have stressed that the Accra-Kumasi Expressway is being financed without external borrowing, creating the impression that this is a new and novel initiative.

However, the same basic financing model had already been developed and applied under the original ATEL framework.

The central question is not whether Ghana should construct the Accra-Kumasi Expressway. Ghana needs better roads and reliable expressway infrastructure.

The real question is whether citizens are being given an accurate account of who developed the financing model, what has already been implemented, why the existing SPV is not being used, and why a substantially similar initiative is being presented as new.

This is the kind of leadership being provided to the country while some citizens applaud without examining the public record. National development requires honesty, yet the lies continue unabated. The truth will ultimately be established by the available records.

Decades after his overthrow in 1966, the questions he raised about African unity, economic independence, global inequality and self-determination remain central to the challenges confronting today’s leaders.

The renewed debate in Ghana about Dr Nkrumah’s legacy has gained added relevance following recent remarks by former New Patriotic Party running mate Matthew Opoku Prempeh.

At Dr Nkrumah’s 117th birthday celebration event, Dr Prempeh called on Ghanaians to rise above partisan politics and honour Dr Nkrumah’s contribution to Ghana, Africa and the wider world.

Speaking at the NkrumahFest in Nkroful, the former Member of Parliament described Ghana’s first president as a “generational thinker”, a liberation icon and an architect of nation-building whose legacy transcends political divisions.

Those comments marked a notable evolution from the controversy that surrounded his 2024 comparison of Nkrumah and former President Nana Akufo-Addo, remarks for which he later apologised and clarified.

Today, however, Dr Prempeh’s call for us to view Dr Nkrumah through a national rather than partisan lens presents an opportunity to revisit the enduring relevance of Osagyefo’s ideas.

Nkrumah beyond Ghana
The significance of Nkrumah was never confined to Ghana. At a time when much of Africa remained under colonial rule, he articulated a vision of political and economic liberation that resonated across the continent.

Long before regional integration became fashionable, Dr Nkrumah argued that Africa could only achieve meaningful development through unity, collective security and shared economic progress. As Dr Prempeh himself observed in Nkroful, Nkrumah’s vision was “expansive, visionary and fiercely Pan-African.”

That message remains strikingly relevant, years after he was forced out. Across Africa, governments continue to grapple with fragmented markets, trade barriers, debt vulnerabilities, resource dependency and geopolitical competition among global powers. The recent creation of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), headquartered in Accra, can be viewed as a modern expression of the continental integration project that Dr Nkrumah championed more than six decades ago.

Dr Nkrumah was also among the earliest African leaders to challenge the structure of the international economic order. He warned that political independence would mean little without economic sovereignty. His concerns about unequal trade relations, dependence on commodity exports and foreign control of strategic resources still echo across policy discussions from Accra to Addis Ababa.

Africa’s demand for stronger voice
As African leaders prepare to address the world through the UN General Assembly, many of the issues dominating the agenda would be familiar to Dr Nkrumah: climate justice, development financing, global governance reform, peace and security, and equitable representation in international institutions.

The debate about Africa’s demand for a stronger voice within the UN Security Council, for instance, reflects the very struggle for global equality that Dr Nkrumah advocated throughout his career.

Dr Nkrumah’s speeches at the UN were notable not merely for their rhetoric but for their insistence that newly independent states deserved equal treatment and respect in world affairs.

He argued that peace could not be separated from justice, and that global prosperity could not be sustained while large parts of humanity remained marginalized. Many of those arguments continue to shape the positions advanced by African governments, including our own President John Dramani Mahama at multilateral forums today.

Yet perhaps Dr Nkrumah’s most relevant lesson for contemporary leaders lies closer to home.

He believed leadership should be driven by a long-term national vision rather than short-term political calculations. While historians continue to debate aspects of his governance and political methods, few dispute his ambition for Ghana and Africa.

He was willing to think beyond electoral cycles and immediate popularity, focusing instead on industrialisation, infrastructure, education and continental influence.

That is the challenge confronting today’s political class. Across Africa, public frustration often stems not from a lack of resources but from a perceived lack of transformational leadership. Citizens increasingly expect leaders to articulate clear national visions, invest in productive sectors, create opportunities for young people and build institutions capable of outlasting individual administrations.

Nkrumah’s lessons
In this regard, Dr Prempeh’s recent comments deserve attention. By acknowledging that Dr Nkrumah’s legacy should rise above partisan rivalries, he touched on an important truth: nations advance when they build on their shared history rather than weaponise it for political gain.

As the world turns its attention to the UN this week, Ghana’s first president offers a reminder that great leadership is not measured solely by electoral victories or economic statistics. It is measured by the ability to inspire a people, shape a nation’s identity and articulate ideas that remain relevant long after one has left office.

More than half a century after his death, Dr Kwame Nkrumah continues to do exactly that. His message of unity, self-reliance, strategic development and Pan-African cooperation remains not just a historical legacy, but a blueprint that many of today’s leaders would do well to revisit.

It is about preparing young people for life, building discipline, rewarding hard work, and creating an environment where every student understands that effort has consequences.

But today, an important question needs to be asked: What happens when students who perform poorly academically are able to secure places in some of the country’s most sought-after Senior High Schools (SHSs), including coveted boarding spaces, while students who worked extremely hard struggle to get the same opportunity?

This is not about humiliating students who obtained lower grades. Every child deserves an opportunity to learn, improve, and build a future.

A student’s examination result should never become a permanent judgment on their worth or potential. However, education must still have standards.

When admission into highly competitive schools becomes disconnected from academic performance, we risk sending a dangerous message to students: “You don’t necessarily have to work that hard; somehow, you may still get the opportunity you want.”

And that message can have consequences.

What Are We Teaching Our Children?

Imagine a student who wakes up every morning before sunrise, attends classes, completes assignments, studies late into the night, sacrifices entertainment, and pushes through difficult subjects because they believe their hard work will earn them an opportunity.

Now imagine that same student watching someone who put considerably less effort into their studies receive an opportunity they desperately wanted.

What happens to motivation? What happens to the belief that hard work matters?
For some students, it may create frustration.

For others, it may gradually destroy the determination to study harder.
A society that wants excellence must make sure that effort, achievement, and opportunity have a meaningful relationship.

Boarding Is More Than a Bed

The desire to attend a top SHS is not only about wearing a particular school uniform or having a prestigious name attached to one’s education.

For many families, boarding provides access to structured study periods, libraries, teachers, academic competition, peer learning, and an environment designed around education.
That makes boarding places especially valuable.

When these limited opportunities are allocated without sufficient consideration for academic performance and merit, we should ask whether we are using those opportunities in the way that best supports educational excellence.

This does not mean that grades should be the only consideration.

Students come from different backgrounds. Some face poverty, inadequate learning resources, difficult family circumstances, disabilities, health challenges, or schools with fewer educational resources.

A fair system should recognize such realities and provide support where necessary.
But supporting disadvantaged students is different from removing academic standards altogether.

We Must Not Punish Students for Working Hard
Ghana must be careful not to create an education system where excellence becomes meaningless.

If a student spends years working hard because they believe good academic performance will open doors, the system should not repeatedly teach them that their effort makes little difference. We should encourage students to dream big.

We should tell them:
Study hard.
Ask questions.
Read.
Practice.
Improve.
Your effort matters.

And when students succeed, society should recognize that achievement—not necessarily with privilege, but with meaningful opportunities to continue developing their potential.

But Let Us Also Help Those Who Struggle

There is another side to this conversation. A student with poor grades should not be written off. A low examination score can be a reflection of many things, and it does not necessarily determine a child’s intelligence or future.

Instead of simply placing every struggling student into a highly competitive environment and assuming the problem has been solved, we should invest in remedial education, academic counselling, vocational pathways, teacher support, tutoring, and stronger basic education.

Let struggling students know: “You can still succeed—but you have to grow.”
That is a much healthier message than either abandoning them or pretending that academic standards do not matter.

Ghana Needs Both Opportunity and Standards
The debate should not be:
“Should students with lower grades have opportunities?”
Of course they should.
The better question is: “How do we create opportunities without destroying the culture of hard work and academic excellence?”
That is the conversation Ghana needs.

Our education system should be compassionate enough to give students a second chance, but disciplined enough to maintain standards.

It should reward excellence without mocking those who struggle.
It should create alternative pathways without making achievement irrelevant.
And most importantly, it should make every child believe that hard work is worth it.
Dear Ghana, Our Children Are Watching
Students are watching how we distribute opportunities.
They are watching who succeeds.
They are watching whether grades matter.
They are watching whether discipline is rewarded.

And eventually, they will respond to the incentives we create. If we want a generation that studies harder, dreams bigger, competes fairly, and takes education seriously, then our policies must communicate a clear message: Your background should not determine your destiny—but your effort, growth, and achievement should matter.

Ghana does not need an education system that simply moves children from one level to another. We need an education system that builds capable, disciplined, confident, and knowledgeable citizens.

So, Hey Ghana!
Let us give every child a chance.
But let us also give standards a chance.
Because when we make hard work meaningless, we do not only disappoint today’s hardworking students.
We risk weakening the ambition of tomorrow’s Ghana.

I am a Ghanaian writer passionate about environmental sanitation and the work of private waste management companies, especially the prestigious Zoomlion Ghana Limited.

I am concerned when people, including Manasseh Azure Awuni, appear to undermine a company that has created jobs, helped address sanitation challenges and contributed to Ghana becoming the West African regional hub for sanitation, waste management, and circular economy policy support.

For more than a decade, Manasseh has unjustifiably criticised Zoomlion and its owner, Dr. Joseph Siaw Agyepong, through articles and commentaries that, in my view, have focused almost exclusively on alleged wrongdoing while rarely acknowledging the company’s achievements or its owner’s ingenuity.

That raises a fundamental question: Can journalism be considered fair and balanced when its scrutiny of one company remains overwhelmingly negative over many years?

Constructive criticism, we all know, should identify problems, offer suggestions and acknowledge achievements where appropriate.

Has Manasseh ever examined Zoomlion’s job creation, investments in waste-management infrastructure, technological initiatives, recycling operations, expansion beyond Ghana or contribution to environmental sanitation? If so, what did he find?

The audit discrepancy

These questions bring me to Manasseh’s current investigation, “Auditing the Auditor-General: How Special Audit Understated a COVID-19 Expenditure.”

The central issue is serious: Why did the Auditor-General’s special audit reportedly record GH¢96.3 million as fumigation expenditure when documents claim from the Ministries of Education, Local Government and Transport allegedly show expenditure of at least GH¢780 million?

That discrepancy requires careful examination.

How did the Auditor-General arrive at GH¢96.3 million? Who supplied and reviewed the figures? Which ministries submitted expenditure records? What methodology determined what qualified as COVID-19 expenditure?

Why were some expenditures allegedly audited but not reflected in the reported fumigation figure? Who within the Audit Service made those decisions?

These questions go directly to the investigation’s central premise. If the allegation is that the Auditor-General understated COVID-19 expenditure, the audit process itself must receive detailed scrutiny.

Institutional responsibility

My concern begins when a question about the Auditor-General’s alleged under-reporting gradually becomes a story about Zoomlion primarily.

The Auditor-General did not award Zoomlion the contracts. Zoomlion did not write the special audit report or determine which expenditures should be included or excluded.

Therefore, if the central allegation concerns an understatement by the Auditor-General, who should answer for it: Zoomlion or the Ghana Audit Service?

If the concern is procurement, equal attention should be given to the ministries and public officials who initiated the procurements, selected the contractor, obtained approvals, supervised the work, certified performance, approved invoices and authorised payment.

Zoomlion does not award itself government contracts. Ministries and public institutions must answer for the decisions they made; the procurement authorities for approvals and ratifications; public officials for supervision, certification and payment; and contractors for the work they were paid to perform.

Accountability should cover every institution and individual involved.

Zoomlion’s relevance

Manasseh reports that approximately GH¢775 million of the GH¢780 million in fumigation expenditure he identified went to Zoomlion. That makes the company materially relevant to the investigation.

However, relevance does not eliminate the need for proportionality and fairness.

The question is whether Zoomlion receives extensive attention because the evidence requires it, or whether the Auditor-General controversy has become another opportunity to revisit longstanding criticisms of the company.

The article also discusses previous Zoomlion contracts, World Bank sanctions, GYEEDA, earlier fumigation arrangements, a 2025 ministerial report and other controversies.

This raises a legitimate question: Is it principally an investigation of the Auditor-General’s COVID-19 audit, or another broad prosecution of Zoomlion through journalism?

If Zoomlion received approximately GH¢775 million, it is reasonable to investigate whether it performed the contracted services, whether public authorities certified the work, whether the prices complied with procurement requirements and whether the state obtained value for money.

But those questions should be addressed through evidence and accompanied by equal scrutiny of the institutions that awarded and paid for the contracts, not the contractor.

Journalistic fairness and consistency

The issue is broader than Dr. Otabil or Zoomlion. It concerns whether journalists apply consistent standards when reporting on people and institutions with whom they have different relationships.

When the Capital Bank saga broke out, some people, including me, called on Manasseh to comment on his pastor and godfather, Dr. Mensah Otabil’s involvement as then chairman of the board of directors. He responded that he would not do so because of their relationship.

That raises questions about consistency. Should the standard of scrutiny change depending on a journalist’s relationship with the person or institution involved?

If personal relationships justify recusal in one case, should personal history, previous disputes or long-running negative campaigns against another organisation also be disclosed so readers can assess possible bias?

Rather than allege, without evidence, that Manasseh has paymasters who benefit from attacks on Zoomlion, I would ask him directly:

What explains the persistence and intensity of your focus on Zoomlion over more than a decade? Are there interests, relationships, funding arrangements or institutional considerations that readers should know about?

After years of predominantly negative reporting about the same company and entrepreneur, readers are entitled to examine not only the subject of the journalism but also its consistency, proportionality and fairness.

Conclusion: Auditor-General or Putting Zoomlion on Trial Again

Zoomlion should not be immune from scrutiny because it is Ghanaian, employs people or operates in an important sector.

Companies handling public money must answer questions about procurement, performance and value for money.

But accountability cannot be selective. The Auditor-General must answer for the audit report.

Ministries must answer for contracts they awarded. Procurement authorities must answer for approvals.

Public officials must answer for certification and payment. Contractors must answer for the work they performed.

Journalists, too, should be open to legitimate questions about consistency, conflicts of interest, proportionality and fairness.

If we genuinely want accountability, the same torch must shine in every direction.

Are we auditing the Auditor-General, investigating COVID-19 expenditure, or simply putting Zoomlion on trial again?

By Mashoud Bawa

Our elders say when you climb a good tree, you deserve a push. In Ghana we have spent years talking about the tree, the buildings, textbooks, and salaries. We have spoken less about the push, the way decisions are made and how teachers are treated while they do the work.

Our study, now published in Social Justice Research, followed 399 teachers in public senior secondary schools in the Greater Accra Region.

We asked a question that matters for our context: in schools where resources are tight and most rewards are decided far from the school gate, what keeps a teacher committed?

Three Ways Teachers Judge Fairness

We looked at fairness from three angles. First, fairness in what is received. Do pay, allowance, workload and promotion match effort? Second, fairness in how decisions are made.

Are transfers, postings, appraisals and discipline handled transparently, consistently, with room for teachers to be heard?

Third, fairness in daily treatment. Do heads and supervisors speak with respect, explain honestly, and affirm professional dignity?

Why Process Outweighs Pay In Our Schools

Fairness in how decisions are made showed the strongest link to teacher performance. When teachers believed the rules were clear and applied without favoritism, they invested more in preparation, classroom management and timely delivery.

Fairness in what is received mattered, but modestly. In our centralized system where salary is set nationally, an extra allowance may ease pressure but does not by itself create attachment to teaching. Fairness in daily treatment alone did not directly lift performance.

A respectful headteacher inside an unpredictable system can only do so much. As our elders warn, when you leave a matter unattended outside, it eventually goes bad. Occasional kindness cannot replace a credible system.

The Quiet Power of Loving The Work

At the center of our work is professional love, the emotional bond, care and commitment teachers develop toward the profession and their students.

It is not sentiment. It is what makes a teacher mark at midnight, stay after school to coach a struggling child, and remain in the classroom when other jobs beckon. That love was built far more by how people were treated than by what they received.

Respectful daily interaction had the strongest link to professional love, followed by fair procedures. When teachers felt respected and understood the rules governing their careers, attachment deepened.

That attachment was strongly linked to better performance. Professional love also acted as the bridge. It carried the influence of fair procedures and respectful treatment to performance. It did not carry the influence of fair rewards. In a context where rewards are seen as decided by a distant authority, getting more does not make teachers love the work more. Being treated fairly does. There is a saying that one hand cannot lift a heavy load. Teacher performance is that heavy load. It is not lifted by pay alone. It is lifted when teachers feel seen, heard and respected.

What Government and Education Service Must Rethink

For those who make policy at the Ministry of Education and the Ghana Education Service, the lesson is plain. First, publish and standardize procedures. Criteria for transfers, postings, promotions, and appraisals should be written, accessible, consistently applied, and open to appeal.

When teachers know the rules and see them applied equally, trust grows. Trust in process allows teachers to focus on teaching instead of navigating informal networks. Second, turn supervision into support. How supervisors speak, explain and correct matters more than we admit.

A framework that requires timely feedback, private correction and adequate explanation costs little and returns much. As the proverb goes, the child who breaks the snail is not the one who suffered to pick it. Those who do not carry the burden of teaching should be careful how they judge it.

Third, think beyond money when you think about welfare. Material incentives remain important but incomplete without fairness in process and treatment.

A teacher who receives an allowance but is transferred without explanation or corrected with public humiliation is unlikely to turn that allowance into better learning for children.

What Heads Can Do Before The Next Assembly

Heads of schools and department heads may not control payroll, but they control climate. You control whether appraisals happen on time and with evidence. You control whether teaching loads are shared with clear reasons. You control whether correction affirms dignity. These everyday choices are not administrative footnotes.

In our study they were the strongest predictors of emotional commitment. Schools that build mentorship, peer collaboration and regular feedback that makes impact visible create conditions where commitment can be sustained.

As elders say, the ruin of a nation begins in the homes of its people. In the same way, the strength of a school begins in the staff common room.

Where respect is absent, even well paid teachers experience fairness as random and commitment becomes fragile.

A Word For Teachers Themselves

For teachers, this research affirms something many know in their bones. Commitment is not bought. It is nurtured. Professional love stabilizes effort when resources are scarce and policies shift. Yet that love is not endless.

When systems treat teachers as interchangeable units rather than professionals, the link between love and performance weakens. Systems that measure teachers without understanding their work slowly erode the motivation they want to increase.

That is why unions, subject associations and Colleges of Education must advocate not only for better pay but for better processes and more humane treatment.

They must demand transparent procedures and model the respectful cultures new teachers will carry into schools.

Where We Go From Here

The future of this country is written in its classrooms, and the quality of those classrooms cannot be separated from how we treat those who stand in them. Our study does not claim resources do not matter.

They do. It shows that in Ghanaian senior secondary schools, where schools have limited control over rewards, fairness in procedures and fairness in daily interaction show stronger links to professional love and sustained effort than fairness in outcomes alone.

If we want teachers to teach with love, we must lead with fairness. When the system is fair, teachers give it their heart. When teachers give their heart, students receive their best.

The writer is a lecturer at University of Professional Studies, Marketing Department

What if the friend who said, “I’m good,” had rehearsed those words because they were too tired to explain what was really happening inside? What if the colleague who made everyone laugh, went home and cried alone?

What if the person who always checks on everyone else is quietly wondering who would check on them? We rarely know.

And perhaps that is what makes suicide so difficult to talk about.

We look for sadness, we look for withdrawal, we look for some unmistakable sign that tells us someone is struggling.

But human beings are complicated. Sometimes pain is loud, sometimes it is remarkably quiet, and sometimes it wears a smile.

There are people who will show up for work while their minds are somewhere else entirely. People who will sit through conversations, answer questions, laugh at jokes, and scroll through their phones while carrying thoughts they are terrified to say out loud.

They are functioning, but they are not okay, and because they are functioning, we assume they are fine.

That assumption can be dangerous.

September is Suicide Prevention Month. It is a month dedicated to reminding us that suicide is not merely a subject for headlines after someone is gone.

It is a conversation we need to have while people are still here.

There are people among us who are fighting battles nobody knows about. They wake up, go to work, and laugh with their friends. They answer messages, attend church, post pictures, make plans, and then they go home and fight battles they have told no one about.

They can have a good job and still feel empty, surrounded by people and still feel completely alone. They can believe in God and still struggle, smile at you and still be trying desperately to survive the day.

So maybe we need to become better at asking questions that go beyond, “How are you?”

Because “I’m fine” has become an easy answer.

Ask again.

And when someone finally says, “I’m not okay,” resist the urge to immediately fix them.

Listen…….

Not with judgement.

Not with, “How could you do that?”

Not with, “But you have everything.”

Not with, “Others are suffering more than you.”

Pain does not always make sense from the outside.

Sometimes people don’t need a lecture. They need somewhere safe to put the pain they have been carrying. Some people have become incredibly good at looking okay, that is one of the most painful things about suicide.

Sometimes, there is no obvious warning. No dramatic goodbye. No public announcement that someone is falling apart. Sometimes, there is simply a person who has become exhausted from pretending that everything is fine.

It happens to human beings.

People who once had dreams.

People who were loved.

People who had responsibilities.

People who made someone laugh.

People who may have spent their final days wondering whether anyone would understand how much pain they were carrying.

The World Health Organization estimates that more than 720,000 people die by suicide every year globally. But behind every number is a story that cannot be reduced to a number.

And perhaps that is where our conversation needs to begin.

Suicide prevention is not only about knowing the warning signs. It is also about creating a world where people do not feel ashamed to say, “I need help.”

It is about making mental health conversations ordinary enough that seeking help does not feel like an admission of failure.

It is about families paying attention, friends checking in, schools taking emotional well-being seriously, workplaces understanding that people are more than their productivity, and faith communities creating room for honesty alongside hope.

And it is about each of us remembering that we may never fully know what the person beside us is carrying.

The colleague who seems unusually quiet.

The friend who has stopped showing up.

The person who keeps saying they are tired.

The young person whose behaviour has suddenly changed.

The person who jokes about not wanting to be here anymore.

Maybe don’t laugh it off.

Maybe don’t dismiss it.

Maybe ask.

“Are you really okay?”

And then stay long enough to hear the answer.

We often tell people to be strong, but perhaps sometimes what they need is permission to admit that they are tired. Tired of pretending, tired of hurting, tired of carrying everything alone.

There is strength in asking for help, there is strength in staying, there is strength in telling someone, “I don’t know how to get through this.”

And there is strength in being the person who hears that and says:

“You don’t have to carry this alone.”

September will end, the campaign hashtags will disappear, posters will come down.

But people will still be struggling.

So let the conversation continue……

Check on your people, listen without judgment, take their pain seriously.

And when someone is struggling, help them find the support they need.

Because sometimes, saving a life does not begin with having the perfect words.

Sometimes, it begins with simply refusing to walk away.

Start the conversation.

The press release dated 14th September, 2026 and signed by Ag. Director of Public Affairs, PNCO Francis Opoku Amoah, reaffirms NACOC’s resolve that Ghana will not be a safe haven for drug barons. That resolve must be commended.

But this same arrest exposes a dangerous truth everyone in the country is aware of: NACOC is succeeding in spite of the system, not because of it.

How can an agency mandated to stop international cartels operate without tools?

A Commission Stranded on Logistics:

Until the current leadership arrived, the transportation situation of the Commission was so bad it was crippling operations. For 8 years, the Commission received only 4 vehicles.

The current administration had to use personal links to secure 27 vehicles to keep operations moving.

A law enforcement agency fighting well-funded cartels cannot be run on charity and personal contacts. It needs a fully budgeted fleet of operational, surveillance, and armored vehicles.

 On Port Operations: Where Are the Tools and the Access?

This latest cocaine shipment left Ghana in a container of alleged plastic waste. It was detected in France, not Ghana. That should worry every Ghanaian.

The Begging Questions:

• At the Tema Port and Takoradi Port, what modern equipment is available for drug detection? Do we have ion scanners, trace detectors, and canine support at scale?

• Is NACOC granted unfettered access to the scanning room?
•  Who controls what is seen and what is not seen?
• Where containers are actually stuffed and loaded – the Inland Container Depots and private warehouses – do we have permanent NACOC officials stationed there?

• Who has been blocking NACOC from such sensitive places for years?

– Has NACOC been granted full access to the Integrated Customs Management System (ICUMS) to profile and flag high-risk shipments in real-time?

If NACOC does not have full, real-time access to ICUMS and the scanning rooms, then we are leaving our gates wide open and only arresting after the drugs have been intercepted in Europe.

 A Call To President Mahama:

The President and the Minister for Interior must take this Bolle Jos case as a wake-up call. You cannot task NACOC to prevent Ghana from becoming a transit hub while starving it of tools.

We call on Government to immediately:

1. Retool NACOC with state-of-the-art drug detection equipment at all entry points – airports, seaports and land borders.

2. Grant NACOC mandatory, unimpeded physical presence in all scanning rooms and container loading bays.

3. Give NACOC full integration and access rights to ICUMS and all port single-window systems.

4. Provide a dedicated budget for fleet, forensic labs, and intelligence technology, so the Commission does not have to rely on links to function.

The officers of NACOC have shown professionalism by arresting these three suspects in custody. Imagine what they could do if they were properly tooled.

READ ALSO:

NACOC arrests three suspects linked to ‘Bolle Jos’ network

Police arrest two, seize 692 parcels of suspected Indian hemp at Dawhenya

NDC supporters blame the NPP, NPP supporters blame the NDC.

Parents blame the government, and government officials blame the system.

Somewhere in the middle of the noise is a 14- or 15-year-old child whose immediate concern is much simpler: “Where am I going to school?”

This year’s scenes at the CSSPS Resolution Centre at GNAT Hall in Accra should force us to pause.

Parents and students have endured long queues, repeated visits, and, in some cases, overnight stays while seeking solutions to placement problems.

Reports from the centre have included concerns about school choices, unsuccessful placement, and changes between boarding and day status. Some parents have called for additional resolution centres and more personnel.

These frustrations are real. But so is another uncomfortable truth: Not every disappointing placement is evidence of political manipulation.

Not every failure of the system is the fault of parents. The real conversation must be bigger than NDC versus NPP.

THE NUMBERS SHOULD MAKE US THINK
School placement is, fundamentally, a problem of matching demand with limited capacity.

The most popular schools cannot accommodate every child who wants to attend them.
That fact is sometimes lost in the political shouting.

A parent may genuinely believe that a child who performed well deserves a particular school. But thousands of other parents may believe exactly the same thing about their children.

When demand is greater than available places, disappointment is inevitable.
The question, therefore, is not simply whether a child got his or her first choice.

The more important questions are how were the choices made? Did the parent understand the choices? Was the information clear? Those are the questions Ghana should be asking.

QUESTION ONE: DID YOU REALLY UNDERSTAND THE EIGHT CHOICES?
This may be the most uncomfortable question for parents.

The current CSSPS guidance requires candidates to arrange eight choices in order of preference.

The official system allows up to two Category A choices, up to three Category B choices, and permits all eight choices to be Category C schools.

There are also limits on boarding selections within the categories. Parents and candidates are expected to check the school, programme, residence type and category for each choice before confirmation.

That is important. Because choosing eight schools does not mean choosing eight schools with identical chances of admission.

And it certainly does not mean that a child is guaranteed a place in any particular school simply because it appears on the list.

This is where parents must take some responsibility. Did you sit with your child and carefully examine the choices?

Did you look at the child’s performance and the competitiveness of the schools? Did you consider the programme being offered?

Did you consider whether the child could realistically travel to the school if placed as a day student? Did you include schools where the child had a genuine chance of securing a place?

Or did the list simply become a collection of the most famous names in Ghanaian secondary education?

PRESEC, Achimota, Wesley Girls, Mfantsipim, St Augustine’s and Opoku Ware.

One prestigious school after another. There is nothing wrong with ambition, but ambition without strategy can become disappointment.

A SCHOOL’S NAME IS NOT A CHILD’S DESTINY
We need to have a difficult conversation about Ghana’s obsession with Category A schools.

Some parents behave as though their child’s entire future depends on attending one of a handful of famous institutions. It does not.

A good school matters. Facilities matter. Teachers matter. Peer environment matters. Programmes matter.

But ultimately, the child matters most. A brilliant student can thrive in a Category B or Category C school.

A child can attend one of the country’s most prestigious schools and still struggle. Indeed, one of the most important questions a parent can ask is not, “Is this the most prestigious school?” but “Is this the school in which my child can learn, develop and thrive?”
That is a very different question.

QUESTION TWO: WHERE WERE WE AS PARENTS?
This is perhaps the hardest question of all. School selection is too important to be outsourced completely to a 14-year-old.

Yet some parents become deeply involved only after the placement result arrives.
Before that, the child may have been left to discuss choices with classmates, friends, or even teachers without meaningful parental oversight.

Then, months later, when the placement is announced, the parent arrives at GNAT Hall asking why the child did not get the desired school.

Parents must be involved before the choices are submitted, not only after the placement goes wrong.

The official CSSPS system itself provides a choice-confirmation stage where candidates can review their recorded choices and edit them before final confirmation.

It specifically advises users to check the school, programme, residence type and category before confirming. That opportunity should be treated seriously. Parents should sit down with their children. Check the codes, check the schools, check the programmes, check boarding or day status, check the order of preference, and then confirm.

BUT LET US NOT BLAME PARENTS FOR EVERYTHING
This is where the government and CSSPS must also accept responsibility. It is not enough to tell parents to “understand the system.”

A national education system must be designed so that ordinary parents can actually understand it.

The fact that parents are repeatedly arriving at resolution centres with similar questions should itself be treated as evidence that communication can be improved.
And the scenes at GNAT Hall are difficult to ignore.

Reports this week describe overcrowding, long queues, and parents waiting for hours, or returning repeatedly, to have their cases addressed. Some parents reportedly spent the night at the facility.

At one point, reports indicated that tensions became so high that a glass door at the GNAT Hall was damaged as parents attempted to enter the auditorium.

This is not how a modern education system should make parents feel. Parents should not have to sleep in a car park to get an answer about their child’s education.

THE RESOLUTION CENTRE CANNOT BECOME THE SYSTEM
The Resolution Centre is supposed to resolve exceptional problems. It cannot become the place where the entire placement system is effectively explained for the first time.

If thousands of parents have to physically converge on one location because they cannot obtain satisfactory answers elsewhere, then we should ask whether the architecture of the complaints system itself needs reform.

To its credit, the Ministry of Education has now announced plans to digitise the placement complaints process from 2027, allowing parents and candidates to submit and resolve complaints through the CSSPS portal.

That is a welcome direction, but digitisation alone will not solve everything.

A parent who cannot understand a complicated process on paper may not understand the same complicated process on a screen.

The reform must therefore combine technology with human support, clear communication and accountability.

AND THEN THERE IS THE POLITICS
This is where Ghana gets itself into trouble. The moment something goes wrong, we ask:
“Which party is responsible?”

But education should not be reduced to NDC versus NPP. The CSSPS has existed across different governments. Placement challenges have existed across different administrations.

Parents have complained about school choices, capacity, boarding and day arrangements, communication and resolution centres under different political parties.

If we change governments but continue to have the same structural problems, then perhaps the problem is bigger than partisan politics.

Political parties will come and go. Our children will not get another BECE because a politician made a mistake.

Their secondary-school years will happen once. That is why placement reform should be treated as a national education issue rather than a party weapon.

POLITICS CAN ALSO HIDE THE REAL PROBLEM

When every placement problem becomes a political argument, we stop discussing capacity.
We stop discussing why some schools are dramatically more attractive than others.
We stop discussing infrastructure.

We stop discussing teacher distribution. We stop discussing the quality of Category B and C schools. We stop asking why parents believe that only a small number of schools can provide their children with a successful future.

And, perhaps most importantly, we stop discussing how to make every good school a school parents are proud to choose.

That should be the national ambition.

Not simply to increase the number of children entering Category A schools, but to raise the quality and attractiveness of schools across the entire system.

WE ALSO NEED TO TALK ABOUT TRANSPARENCY
Parents have legitimate questions. Why was my child placed there? Why was the residential status changed? Why was my child’s choice not available?

Why did another candidate with apparently similar results receive a different placement?
These questions deserve clear answers.

The Ministry has explained that some requests cannot be accommodated where schools, particularly certain Category A and B institutions, have already reached capacity.

That is precisely why transparency matters. If a school is full, say so.

If a placement cannot be changed, explain why.

If the candidate must use self-placement, explain the available options. If a case requires national-level intervention, tell the parent exactly where to go.

The official CSSPS platform already provides a self-placement process for candidates who are not automatically placed, allowing them to select from schools with available vacancies.

The challenge is making sure parents understand these pathways before frustration turns into confrontation.

THE CHILD MUST NOT BECOME THE VICTIM
There is another dimension we often overlook. The child is listening. At home, the child hears: “The government has destroyed your future.”

At the resolution centre: “They have given you the wrong school.”

On social media: “The system is corrupt.” And in political arguments: “This is because of NDC.” Or: “This is because of NPP.”

What does that child hear? That their future has already been ruined.
We need to be careful. A placement disappointment should not become a psychological burden placed on a young person who has just completed basic education.

The message should instead be: “This is not the school we expected. Let’s understand what happened, examine our options and find the best path forward.”

That is what responsible parenting sounds like.

THE WAY FORWARD
The CSSPS is not perfect. Parents are not perfect. Schools are not perfect, and governments are not perfect.

But we can build a better system.

First, make the school-selection process radically clearer.

Parents should receive simple, practical explanations of what the eight choices mean, including the implications of category, programme, residence and capacity.

Second, make parental involvement part of the process. A parent should not first see the submitted choices after the results are released.

Third, publish clearer information on competitiveness, capacity and placement rules, while protecting the integrity of the system.

Fourth, strengthen schools outside the most competitive category. If parents are constantly fighting over a handful of schools, the long-term answer is not to magically create thousands of additional Category A places.

It is to make more schools genuinely excellent.

Fifth, reform the Resolution Centres. Regional centres should be properly staffed and equipped. Cases should be triaged. Simple issues should be resolved locally. Complex cases should be escalated.

Parents should be able to track their complaints without physically returning to a queue.
Sixth, complete the transition to a credible digital complaints system, but make sure it is accessible to parents who need human assistance.

The Ministry’s planned digital complaints platform from 2027 is a step in that direction.
And finally: Stop turning every national education problem into NDC versus NPP.

THE QUESTION WE SHOULD REALLY BE ASKING
A parent once put the issue to me in a way that stayed with me:
“I fought for Category A for my first child. He got it, but he struggled.

My second child went to a Category B school I had properly researched. Today, he is a prefect and thriving.” That should make us think.

Perhaps the greatest mistake we make is confusing prestige with potential. Our children do not need a political party blame-game to succeed.

They need parents who are involved, they need schools that are properly resourced, they need teachers who are supported, they need a placement system that is fair and transparent, and when something goes wrong, they need a Resolution Centre that treats them with self-possession.

So yes, let us demand accountability from government. Let us demand transparency from CSSPS.

Let us demand better facilities across our schools. Let us demand properly staffed and humane Resolution Centres. But let us also look in the mirror.
Did we understand the eight choices? Did we participate in the selection process?
Did we give our children realistic options? Did we consider the school, or only the name of the school?

And when the result disappointed us, did we seek a solution, or immediately seek a political enemy? Ghana’s children deserve better than that.

Their education is too important to become another battlefield for NDC and NPP.
Let us fix the system without destroying confidence in it.

Let us hold government accountable without surrendering parental responsibility. And above all, let us remember that the ultimate goal of school placement is not to produce the largest number of children in Category A schools.

It is to give every Ghanaian child a genuine opportunity to thrive.

This is a very important video because it highlights the importance of French in West Africa. To begin, Ghana sits at the heart of a predominantly French-speaking sub-region.

We are a full member of the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie, a clear signal that French is central to our national agenda. Yet, a troubling disconnection persists.

Despite years of formal instruction, many Ghanaian students and even university graduates find it difficult to communicate beyond “Bonjour, ça va?” or “Comment tu t’appelles? ”.

For a long time, the explanation has been attributed on one hand to rote learning. We blamed an over-emphasis on memorization at the expense of communication.

On the other hand, which is more anecdotal, many students, by perception or verification, associated caning with the “professeurs de français”, eventually extinguishing their love for the language.

Well, maybe we could spare those teachers a bit because Ghana, for lack of adequate teachers since time immemorial, helped itself out with those from nearby Francophone countries who came in with little English and many a time zero indigenous language background for purposes of alternance codique.

Could we completely chastise these facilitators when the genesis of the didactics of French as a foreign language stressed correcting the child with some strokes in the palm?

But that argument no longer fully holds. The truth is more complex and more uncomfortable.

It’s Not the Syllabus

The French language syllabus in Ghana has already undergone significant reforms. It now emphasizes practical usage, communicative competence, and real-life interaction.

In principle, our students are expected not just to learn French, but to use it, to speak, to respond, and to negotiate meaning.

The senior high school graduate should be in the position to lead a francophone friend to a “waakye” joint, mediate with the vendor for choices of egg, macaroni, salade, and fish.

The graduate of health information management will have no excuse not to understand and collect basic information from a confused francophone patient.

How about the one who specialized in the language? The ease of interaction and quick reflexes will suit them.

So, the question must be asked: If the curriculum has evolved, why are the outcomes lagging like a naïve child chasing the setting sun?

Have we modernized the syllabus on paper but left the actual classroom in a time capsule? Are we lacking the audio-visual tools and digital “scaffolds” that make language acquisition meaningful?

Or is there a deeper challenge, a “complex educational dilemma” that teachers must walk between following strict exam rules and fostering the emotional confidence a student needs to speak a new language?

The “Passive Learner” and the Classroom Walls

Language does not thrive in isolation. We are currently witnessing what experts call the “Participation without proficiency dilemma.”

This occurs when a student possesses neatly arranged textbooks and an updated syllabus but lacks the “urgency” or the environment to actually live the language.

When French is confined strictly to a 40-minute period with hundreds of students sitting rigidly in rows and columns, the obvious answers hit us right in the face. How many out of these two scores can be assigned to individuals to reflect? 

How do we form groups for a collective knowledge construction to make them social organisms? Can we really tame interaction in a language classroom? It becomes a theoretical marathon rather than a functional tool.

If students cannot speak after years of study, we must stop blaming the “plan” and start questioning how that plan is executed.

We need to move from seeing French instruction as a mere checklist of grammar rules and start seeing it as a magic key to opening doors.

A student may spend hours conjugating verbs, but without “psychological safety” the freedom to make mistakes and experiment without fear that is those structures remain locked in their head.

Who is explaining to the “apprenant” that it is very normal that her mother tongue has a greater influence on how she will sound in the foreign language she’s mastering?

We need to commend efforts and allay students’ fear of making errors and emphasize real-life interaction.

After all, the learning of French no longer seeks phonetic perfection like methods that once forcefully refined learners into choristers adjusting their lips for musical harmony. We have modernized our goals, but have we modernized our support systems?

A Call to Action: Joining the Conversation

Addressing this linguistic gap is not just an academic concern; it is a strategic one. Language is access. It is mobility. It is participation. Without it, Ghana risks unintentional isolation within a region that is making headway without its star.

To bridge the gap, we need a collective shift:

To parents, you are the first influencers. Normalize exposure. Let the children hear French in the home through music, cartoons, and simple phrases. Make the language “sound” like the tele novellas, the Kumkum bhagyas, and the morning devotions before it “looks” like a school subject.

To our teachers, embrace the communicative intent already embedded in your syllabus. Create classrooms that are safe spaces for “imperfect” French, leveraging the art of teaching within you. Focus on engagement and the “why” of learning as much as the content.

And to our policymakers, documentation is not implementation. Match curriculum reforms with real-world resources, continuous professional development that does not replicate language classrooms elsewhere but rather those right here, and monitoring mechanisms that prioritize oral fluency over written test scores.

To us as a society, we must normalize French in our media, our markets, and our youth culture. The engagement we have with our smartphones, akin to the peace Ghana enjoys, has equally important content in French available on our favorite social media platforms.

Entertainment, fashion, sports, culinary arts, etc. For nomophobia without purpose is equivalent to annihilation. Let’s stop treating it as a foreign “requirement” and start embracing it as part of our West African identity.

The message from that TikTok video is clear: French is not waiting to be discovered; it is already here, already dominant, and already shaping the opportunities across our borders.

French is already speaking all around us, it is in our trade, at our borders, and in our regional boardrooms.

One might not believe that the Kente and fugu weavers, as well as the “chawchaw” fabricator can achieve substantial gains if they record themselves and achieve viral reach and articulate “ce boubou est bon marché, ceci est d’une qualité rare, ça vous donne une allure de prince.”

The real question is no longer whether we can hear it, but whether Ghana is finally ready to respond.

“French is no longer knocking at Ghana’s door; it is already speaking in the four walls of our rooms.

The real question is whether we are ready to participate in this evolving dialogue.”

About the author:

Maame Ama Boadiwaa

Lecturer, Department of Communication Studies

University of Professional Studies, Accra

But the markets are quiet, the hearths have grown cold, and a story of sorrow is all that is told.

The pathways once beaten by communal feet are surrendered to grass in a bitter retreat;
Keri is crying, her beauty defiled.

For the ghost of a home and the fear of a child. How deep are the roots of the Challa and Akyode? They traveled together down every long road.

In the warmth of the kitchen, in the sweat of the field, the bonds of their marriage were sacredly sealed.

A child of the union carries both in their veins, a bridge built of blood that now staggers in chains.

When brother meets brother with fire in his eyes, it is his own kin that he wounds till he dies.

We ask of the shadows, how did we arrive? Where the hunger for vengeance is all that survives.

The dialogue vanished, the whispers took flight, turning neighbors to phantoms in the dead of the night.

But there is no victor when the village is burned, only lessons of grief that are painfully learned.

Every grave that is dug in the soil of our hate is a theft from the future, a seal on our fate.

The win is a wound that the whole body feels, a fracture of spirit that no weapon heals.

It is felt by the mother whose comfort is gone, by the father who dreads the arrival of dawn.

It is seen in the ruins where livelihoods stood, drowned in the name of a misunderstood good.

For what is the prize of a desolate land?
If you’ve nothing but ashes left in your hand?

The history of Keri is longer than strife, built on the promise of shared, simple life.

The ties that once bound us are stronger than steel, if we find the great courage to soften and heal.

Let the elders assemble, let the leaders take heed, to plant for the children a different seed.

For the young ones are watching the choices we make, will we give them a home or a heart-rending ache?

Revenge is a circle that offers no light, it only extends the despair of the night.

True justice is steady, it walks through the door of reason and truth, seeking peace evermore.

Let the rumors be silenced, let anger be stilled, before every hope for our people is killed.

Keri deserves better than funerals and fear; she deserves to be cherished, she deserves to be dear.

The crying must stop at the edge of the field, where the wounds of the past are acknowledged and healed.

Choose to be neighbors, choose to be one, finish the work that our fathers begun.

For when we choose Keri, we choose to survive, to keep the great heart of our culture alive.

Let the grass be for grazing, let the homes be for grace, as we welcome the peace of a shared, holy place.

For some, the screen brought celebration.
For others, it brought confusion, disappointment and a frantic search for answers.

The Computerised School Selection and Placement System (CSSPS) had once again opened its doors.
And, as has become an annual ritual, Ghana was soon divided between parents celebrating coveted placements and others asking the same difficult question: How did my child end up here?

The 2026 exercise has placed 527,932 candidates into Senior High Schools, Senior High Technical Schools and Technical and Vocational Education and Training institutions.

That represents about 87.3 per cent of the 604,567 candidates who qualified for placement after the 2026 Basic Education Certificate Examination (BECE).

But behind those numbers is another figure that has become central to this year’s debate: 76,635 qualified candidates were not automatically placed.
The reason is revealing.

According to the Ministry of Education, 313,283 candidates selected Category A schools as their first choice, competing for just 76,417 declared vacancies.

The Ministry says the challenge is therefore not necessarily a shortage of spaces in the secondary education system, but a mismatch between where vacancies exist and where students want to go.
And that mismatch is where the annual CSSPS drama begins.

When a dream school becomes a disappointment
For many BECE candidates, school selection starts months before placement.

Parents discuss schools with friends. Teachers offer advice. Children dream about uniforms, houses, campuses and traditions.

The names of highly subscribed schools dominate conversations.
But when the placement results arrive, dreams can quickly collide with reality.

A candidate may have performed strongly but still miss out on a preferred school because thousands of other students are competing for limited vacancies.

This is one of the fundamental realities of CSSPS: good grades alone do not guarantee admission to a particular school.

Placement takes into account academic performance, programme choices, school preferences and available vacancies.

(CSSPS)
The result is that two students with seemingly similar grades can receive different outcomes depending on the schools and programmes they selected.

For disappointed parents, however, the explanation is often difficult to accept.
The question is simple:
“If my child performed well, why didn’t he or she get the school we selected?”

The self-placement scramble
For candidates who are not automatically placed, the next option is self-placement.
The official CSSPS portal allows an unplaced candidate to select a school and programme with available vacancies.

The process requires the candidate to log in, select a region, choose an available school, select an available programme and residence type, and submit the application.

On paper, it is a practical solution.
In reality, it can become another source of anxiety.
Vacancies are limited, preferred schools may no longer be available, and families have to make decisions quickly.

For parents without reliable internet access or adequate digital skills, the process can also be intimidating.

This is particularly important in a country where access to technology and reliable connectivity is not uniform.

The system may be digital, but the people using it do not all begin from the same starting point.
The human cost of placement

For some families, the placement challenge is not simply about getting a school.
It is about distance, accommodation and money.

A student placed far from home may mean additional transport costs. A boarding placement comes with expenses for school items, transportation and other requirements.

Even after securing a placement, parents must still navigate the admission process.
This year, however, the Ministry says the CSSPS has been upgraded to allow parents and guardians to complete parts of the admission and enrolment process online and download relevant documents without necessarily travelling to individual schools.

The Ministry says the move is intended to reduce the financial and logistical burden on families.
That is a welcome development.

But for many families, the bigger question remains: What happens when the placement itself is disputed?

GNAT HALL: where frustration meets the system
In Accra, the answer has been playing out at the National Placement Resolution Centre at GNAT Hall.

The centre has witnessed large numbers of parents and candidates seeking assistance with placement problems.

Reports from the facility describe long queues, hours of waiting and growing frustration among people seeking answers to their individual cases.

Parents have called for additional resolution centres and more personnel to reduce congestion.

The situation exposes one of the biggest weaknesses in the current model.

A system designed to digitise school placement still depends heavily on physical intervention when things go wrong.

And when thousands of people need human assistance at the same time, even a well-intentioned resolution mechanism can quickly become overwhelmed.

The Ministry has acknowledged the challenge.
It says it plans to digitise the placement complaints process from 2027, allowing parents and candidates to submit and resolve concerns through the CSSPS portal rather than relying so heavily on physical resolution centres.

That could represent one of the most significant changes to the placement process since its introduction.

So, has CSSPS achieved its purpose?
The answer is complicated.

There is no doubt that CSSPS has transformed school placement.

It has replaced a system that could be vulnerable to human discretion with a computerised process designed to match candidates to schools based on defined criteria.

It has also expanded the ability to process hundreds of thousands of candidates.
But efficiency is not the same as perfection.

After more than two decades, the recurring complaints suggest that the conversation must move beyond whether CSSPS can place students.

The bigger question should be:
Can CSSPS place students in a way that is transparent, understandable, accessible and trusted by the public?

A system can successfully place more than half a million students and still leave thousands of families frustrated.

That is the paradox Ghana must confront.
The real problem may be the choices we make
The 2026 figures offer an important lesson.
More than 313,000 candidates selected Category A schools as their first choice, while the declared vacancies in those schools stood at just 76,417.

Meanwhile, Category B and C schools had significantly larger numbers of declared vacancies.

This raises a difficult but necessary question:
Are Ghanaian families placing too much emphasis on a relatively small group of schools?

For years, school reputation has been heavily associated with a limited number of institutions.

The consequence is predictable: thousands of candidates chase the same schools while other institutions struggle to attract students.

Perhaps the solution is not simply to increase vacancies in the most popular schools.
Perhaps Ghana must also invest in making more schools equally desirable.

That means better infrastructure, laboratories, libraries, accommodation, teaching resources, sports facilities and, most importantly, confidence in the quality of education being delivered.
Beyond the annual drama
Every September, Ghana has the same conversation.
Parents queue.
Students worry.
Social media fills with screenshots.
Some families celebrate.
Others cry.

And eventually, the country moves on until the next placement season.
But perhaps we should not move on so quickly.
Because CSSPS is more than a computer system.

It is the mechanism through which hundreds of thousands of young Ghanaians begin the next chapter of their education.

For the student who gets the dream school, it can be a moment of triumph.

For the student who does not, it can feel like the end of a dream.
But the school a child attends should not determine the limits of that child’s future.

The real measure of Ghana’s education system should be whether every child, regardless of the school assigned, has access to quality teaching, adequate facilities, opportunity and a fair chance to succeed.

Twenty-one years after CSSPS was introduced, perhaps the question is no longer simply whether the system works.

The question is whether we are ready to make it work better for everyone.
School placement is here again.

The celebrations will fade. The tears will dry. The queues at resolution centres will eventually disappear.

But the lessons must remain.
Ghana should not wait another year to fix the problems we already know exist.

For Ghana, that time has come.

The country’s basic and secondary education system has become excessively obsessed with examinations, grades, aggregates, school categories and placement.

Every year, hundreds of thousands of young people are pushed through the same cycle.

Write the Basic Education Certificate Examination.

Wait for the results.

Select schools.

Pray for placement.

Fight over Category A schools.

Accept Category B or C when Category A does not work.

Then spend three years preparing for another major examination — the West African Senior School Certificate Examination.

After that, compete again for university admission.

And we call this education.

I do not.

I call it an examination pipeline.

And Ghana needs to have the courage to dismantle it.

SCRAP THE BECE. SCRAP THE WASSCE. START AGAIN.

My position is straightforward:

The BECE and WASSCE, in their current high-stakes forms, should be scrapped.

Not renamed.

Not cosmetically reformed.

Not subjected to another committee review.

Not given another grading formula.

Scrapped.

And replaced with a modern assessment system that measures what children actually know, what they can do, what they are capable of learning and what pathway best suits their abilities.

Because if the objective of education is to develop human beings, then our assessment system should not be designed primarily to sort them into winners and losers.

What exactly are we achieving with BECE?

Consider what happens after a child writes the BECE.

The child does not simply graduate from basic education and move smoothly into secondary education.

The child enters another competition.

The current CSSPS system requires candidates to make choices across school categories. Under the 2026 guidelines, candidates can select up to two Category A schools, up to three Category B schools and additional Category C choices. (CSSPS)

And this is where the absurdity begins.

We have created a system in which the letters A, B and C have become a social ranking of children and schools.

Category A.

Category B.

Category C.

Everybody understands what these letters are increasingly perceived to mean.

A is the “best.”

B is the next level.

C is what many people regard as the option you settle for when you cannot get what you wanted.

But who created this mentality?

We did.

And government policy has helped institutionalise it.

Instead of asking why every public senior high school cannot provide a comparable standard of education, we have created a competition for a limited number of schools and then designed a computerised system to distribute disappointment.

That is not educational transformation.

The placement crisis is telling us something

The latest placement exercise should force the country to pause.

Reports indicate that roughly 50,000 BECE candidates failed to qualify for SHS placement because they did not meet the required English or Mathematics threshold. (Facebook)

Think about that number.

These are not numbers on a spreadsheet.

They are children.

Fifty thousand young people.

Behind every candidate is a mother, a father, a guardian, a teacher and a family that has invested years of hope in that child’s education.

Yet our response is essentially:

You failed the required subjects, so you did not qualify.

Then what?

Where is the structured second chance?

Where is the intensive remedial pathway?

Where is the alternative educational route?

Where is the system designed to identify why the child failed and help the child overcome the problem?

Instead, we have built an education system where one examination can determine whether a child progresses to the next stage.

That is too much power to give to one examination.

And then comes WASSCE

Suppose the child survives BECE and enters SHS.

The examination culture does not end.

It becomes worse.

For three years, the student is told that another examination is waiting.

WASSCE.

Three years of schooling eventually become condensed into examination performance.

Then we publish league tables.

We compare schools.

We compare regions.

We compare candidates.

We celebrate the highest-performing schools.

We shame the lowest-performing ones.

And once again, the system asks:

Who passed?

But I want to ask a different question:

What did they learn?

There is a difference.

A student can learn how to pass an examination without necessarily developing the intellectual, practical, social and professional competencies required to succeed in life.

The WASSCE culture has become too powerful

WASSCE was created as an assessment mechanism.

But it has gradually become something much larger.

It determines university opportunities.

It determines public perception of schools.

It determines whether a student is labelled academically successful.

It influences parental decisions.

It influences school reputations.

It influences employment conversations.

And it reinforces the idea that academic performance in a standardised examination is the most important indicator of a young person’s potential.

That is a dangerous philosophy.

A child is more than an aggregate.

A child is more than a grade.

A child is more than a WASSCE certificate.

We are producing examination survivors

Our education system should be producing thinkers.

Problem-solvers.

Researchers.

Entrepreneurs.

Technicians.

Scientists.

Writers.

Engineers.

Farmers.

Designers.

Innovators.

Leaders.

But too often, the immediate objective becomes:

Pass the examination.

So students memorise.

Teachers rush through syllabuses.

Parents pay for extra classes.

Schools compete over results.

Students become terrified of failure.

And everybody forgets the fundamental purpose of education.

To prepare a human being for life.

The category system exposes the deeper problem

The Category A, B and C arrangement is not the root of the problem.

It is a symptom.

The deeper problem is that Ghana has allowed its education system to become a hierarchy of institutions instead of a network of institutions providing quality education.

The CSSPS guidelines themselves acknowledge the categories and use them to regulate school choices. (CSSPS)

But why should we need such a hierarchy?

If one school has better laboratories, improve laboratories elsewhere.

If one school has better teachers, examine its staffing and leadership.

If one school has better ICT facilities, replicate the infrastructure.

If one school consistently produces stronger academic outcomes, investigate what it is doing differently and spread those practices.

Do not simply put a letter beside the school’s name and tell the rest of Ghana that some schools are superior.

That is lazy policy.

The computer cannot solve a human problem

We have become too fascinated with computerised placement.

Automatic placement.

Self-placement.

Manual placement.

The official CSSPS system even provides these different placement routes. (CSSPS)

But a computer can only process the rules humans give it.

If the rules produce inequality, the computer will efficiently distribute the inequality.

If the system has too few spaces in highly demanded schools, the computer cannot manufacture additional spaces.

If parents believe Category A is superior to Category C, the computer cannot change that perception.

Technology is not the solution to a fundamentally flawed educational philosophy.

What should replace BECE and WASSCE?

Scrapping BECE and WASSCE does not mean scrapping assessment.

That distinction is critical.

Ghana should replace the current high-stakes examination model with continuous, competency-based and nationally moderated assessment.

A student’s performance should be assessed over time.

Their academic knowledge should matter.

But so should:

• critical thinking;
• communication;
• digital literacy;
• creativity;
• practical skills;
• problem-solving;
• teamwork;
• research;
• entrepreneurship;
• technical competence; and
• civic responsibility.

A national assessment can still exist.

But it should not be a single examination that effectively tells a teenager:

This is how much your future is worth.

We need multiple routes to success

Not every Ghanaian child needs to become a university graduate.

And there is nothing inferior about that.

We need world-class technical and vocational education.

We need modern apprenticeship programmes.

We need strong agricultural education.

We need technology and digital-skills pathways.

We need creative arts.

We need entrepreneurship.

We need professional education.

We need academic education.

The mistake is pretending that every child must pass through exactly the same examination gate before society recognises their potential.

Ghana should stop ranking schools and start strengthening them

Imagine a different Ghana.

Imagine a country where a child does not have to obsess over whether their school is Category A, B or C.

Imagine parents asking:

“What programme does the school offer?”

“What are the teachers like?”

“What practical opportunities does my child have?”

“What skills will my child acquire?”

“What support does the school provide?”

That is the conversation we should be having.

Not:

“Which category is the school?”

This is not an attack on teachers

Our teachers deserve enormous respect.

Many teachers are working under difficult circumstances and doing everything they can to help students succeed.

The problem is the architecture within which they operate.

A teacher cannot fundamentally change an assessment system alone.

A headteacher cannot abolish WASSCE.

A parent cannot abolish CSSPS.

A student certainly cannot.

Government must take responsibility for the system it has designed.

The government must stop patching the problem

Every year, we hear about reforms.

Change the number of school choices.

Change the categories.

Adjust the placement process.

Open self-placement.

Modify the rules.

Then the following year, we return to the same arguments.

This is not reform.

It is maintenance.

Ghana needs structural reform.

And structural reform sometimes requires admitting that an old system has reached the end of its useful life.

Scrap it — and build something better

I am therefore calling for a national conversation on the complete abolition of the current BECE and WASSCE model.

Not because examinations are inherently evil.

Not because academic standards do not matter.

And certainly not because students should not be assessed.

But because the assessment system should serve education — education should not serve the assessment system.

That distinction has been lost.

We have allowed the examination to become the destination.

It should only be one tool along the journey.

The children of Ghana deserve better.

They deserve an education system that discovers their strengths rather than defining them by their weaknesses.

They deserve an education system that gives a struggling student another opportunity rather than closing the door.

They deserve schools whose quality does not depend on whether they carry an A, B or C label.

They deserve pathways that recognise the engineer, the lawyer, the journalist, the farmer, the electrician, the programmer, the entrepreneur, the artist and the skilled technician.

Most importantly, they deserve an education system designed for the Ghana of 2030 and beyond, not one that simply continues what previous generations inherited.

So yes, I will say it plainly:

SCRAP THE BECE.

SCRAP THE CURRENT WASSCE MODEL.

SCRAP THE CATEGORY A, B AND C PRESTIGE CULTURE.

SCRAP THE EXAMINATION-OBSESSED MODEL OF EDUCATION.

Then let us build something worthy of the Ghanaian child.

Because the purpose of education is not to produce children who are exceptionally good at passing examinations.

The purpose of education is to produce people who are exceptionally prepared for life.

Sadly, Ghana has lost that glory. We have traded high standards and quality for propaganda and clicks. Radio and television stations now allow everything and anything just for views.

We chase clickbait without concern for its consequences on the public good.

There is no proper production. News bulletins have become opinion shows. People say anything, anyhow, and go live on air without context, fact-checking, or retraction.

It is as if we are in a jungle, no values, nothing. Yet we are quick to compare ourselves to nations that are progressing precisely because they apply principles and values.

Choice of words no longer matters. Unsavory, unprintable language is now considered “normal.” Presenters pontificate instead of analyse.

News is no longer reported; it is performed. The question is: How do we grow as a nation without standards?

The Constitution Gave Freedom With Responsibility.

Our media freedom was not accidental. The framers of the 1992 Constitution devoted an entire chapter to it.

Article 162(1) guarantees: “Freedom and independence of the media are hereby guaranteed.”

Article 162(4) protects editors from control and harassment for their editorial views.
Article 21(1)(a) guarantees every Ghanaian freedom of speech and expression.
But this freedom was never absolute. It came with a duty.

Article 164 is explicit: The freedoms in Articles 162 and 163 are subject to laws “reasonably required in the interest of national security, public order, public morality and for the purpose of protecting the reputations, rights and freedoms of other persons.”

In other words, media freedom is not freedom to defame, to incite, or to pollute the public sphere.

Article 167 creates the National Media Commission (NMC) and mandates it to:
(a) promote and ensure the freedom and independence of the media;

(b) “take all appropriate measures to ensure the establishment and maintenance of the highest journalistic standards in the mass media, including the investigation, mediation and settlement of complaints made against or by the press or other mass media;” and

(c) insulate state-owned media from governmental control.

The National Media Commission Act, 1993 (Act 449) and the Electronic Communications Act, 2008 (Act 775) which empowers the NCA to regulate broadcast spectrum, further reinforce this mandate for standards and public interest.

Even the repeal of criminal libel in 2001 did not remove professional responsibility.

The GJA Code of Ethics, the NMC Guidelines for Local Language Broadcasting, and Sections 208 of the Criminal Offences Act (Act 29) on publication of false news still hold journalists accountable for truth, fairness, and decency.

Where Are The Gatekeepers?
The NMC, GJA, GIBA, PRINPAG, and all the bodies that were once the checking and balancing tools to ensure quality are now looking on, all in the name of media freedom, pluralism, and competition.

Freedom without standards is anarchy. Pluralism without ethics is noise.
TV, radio and online portals now copy each other’s sub-standard content in a race to the bottom, all because of who has the highest views.

Media is not about who has the most beautiful and handsome presenters and anchors. It is about credibility, accuracy, and service to Ghana.

Action Now Or Never
Ghana can only progress when we agree that we cannot do anything anyhow and expect different results.
We need action now:

1. The NMC must bite. Use Article 167(b) to enforce its content standards, investigate, and sanction. Mediation is not enough.
2. GJA and GIBA must purge and train. Reinstate peer review and enforce the Code of Ethics.
3. Media Owners must invest in producers. Go back to the glory days where producers directed what should be said and what should not be said. Hire gatekeepers, not just faces.
4. The public must punish clickbait. Switch off, report, and patronize quality.
   Media freedom under Article 162 was given to us to build democracy, not to destroy it.
   Better late than never. Let us go back to the days of standards, values, and truth.

Because without standards, we have no media. We only have a loudspeaker in a jungle.

But woe unto anyone who was named ‘Justice’ even at birth. It’s even worse if Justice was conferred as a title.

In either case, please don’t run across the village square beating your chest as King Solomon; for Justice is also a cross, indeed an eternal burden that may trail you until death do you part.

The title may sentence you to a life of misery: solitude, loneliness (‘anti-so,’), when you realize overnight that you are always home alone.

If you break jail and escape to normal social life, Justice Asomasi, please be prepared for the ‘kwɛnsekwɛnses’ as said in Cape Coast. That is indeed the current plight of Justice Baffoe Bonnie: he has broken jail.

If you were a judge of the Supreme Court those days, people stole glances at you in public, and sinners could even flee, fearing possible orders of ‘monkye no.’

To ever meet a Chief Justice was rare since he was by law often in disguise: wig, gown plus a frown. He was a virtual archbishop; alpha and omega; King Solomon’s next of kin.

The world of justices became more common in 2013, during the Supreme Court hearings on 2012 elections, when the baritone voice of Justice Atugugba on live TV, brought ‘deities’ to your doorstep.

I myself never knew he was mortal enough until 2019, when, in my capacity as a temporary big man, I sat next to him at an official function in Accra.

I was surprised to have survived a 30-minute chat with him and to learn that he was even an uncle to my classmate in Legon.

With Chief Justice Baffoe-Bonnie, I knew he was courting trouble when soon after his big appointment 2025, he was ‘caught’ at a thanksgiving church service making merry and dancing like a mortal: waste-line liberated, hands mid-air, singing joyously, and virtually lost in merriment.

Unbeknownst to him, TV cameras followed, ignoring the media convention: ‘New Chief Justice dances in church, please switch off cameras.’

I knew Baffoe-Bonnie fairly well in his Sarbah Hall days, and was aware that unrestrained, his regular dance moves could set off a fire alarm!

I had also followed him as part of the historic Supreme Court panel whose ruling ratified the Mahama/Amissah-Arthur presidency.

In 2025, Baffoe came under close scrutiny on his appointment as Chief Justice to replace Ghana’s third female CJ (Torkonoo), who had been unfairly removed.

In replacing the beloved CJ, had Ghana exchanged its digital color television for a black and white analogue? The answer now blows in the wind.

May 2026, our CJ travels to the US/Canada for the World Cup with a government delegation, joining in the joyous celebration of Ghana in matches won (no problem, but eyebrows were raised).

Next stop, joining government delegations mourning with the Gold Boy Sammy on the passing of his in-law. (No problem, but eyebrows raised.)

The last straw was this September when he ignored multiple judicial issues overflowing his in-tray and strayed into the realm of state-owned enterprises, which was none of his formal business.

Here, CJ waxed political without apologies. He stunned his audience, comparing the high productivity of current staff, to their dismal performance in the previous Government now in opposition. Justice Baffoe-Bonnie only stopped short chanting a party slogan.

The incident was without precedence and courted anger and shock across the landscape: a rude awakening that Ghana’s scale of justice had been vandalized by the Chief himself, who then loses any moral authority to lead an independent judiciary. In traditional settings he would have walked back home barefooted.

Find below a sampling of the public uproar in the media:

‘The JDM boy has taken over Government PR’…’ Judiciary independence is gone…’ ‘A disgrace to the judiciary…’ ‘Desecrating the office of CJ…’ ‘When I saw the video, I said Jesus we are doomed…’ ‘CJ has won a political jersey… grounds for resignation’… ‘He has overstepped his bounds’— ‘the judiciary is now led by a politician,’ etc. And then this bombshell: ‘He has been working with us since 2012…’

The September breaking news reminds me of the late 1990’s when the Council of State ‘absent-mindedly’ vacated their office and became presidential errand boys: welcoming the President at the airport, reading speeches on his behalf, etc.

Then also was the horror story of one great Justice, who got promoted as CJ in 1996 but immediately stumbled by jailing a columnist in error.

My right hand at the time charitably advised the President to quickly write to the CJ and ‘apologize unreservedly for any embarrassment the promotion has caused him.’

In the current case though, our CJ has only three months to retire, having gotten his new position close to his sendoff.

If so, C. J.’s tongue-slip should be simply interpreted by the President as an APPLICATION FOR EARLY RETIREMENT.

In truth, CJ’s venerable title as ‘Chief’ has faded too soon, leaving behind an impaired reputation and a tilted scale of justice.

We live in very uncertain and precarious times. If one would heed the advice of the prophet Amos (in Amos 5:13), silence, outright silence will become our lot.

Yet, we are invited into CITIZENSHIP by the Constitution, 1992 in Articles 2, 3, and 41 to be brief. So, carefully and cautiously, we shall proceed to execute our Republican responsibility without fail. Indeed, I have the privilege to be a true REPUBLIC DAY BORN. May God be our Help as in ages past.

MY ARGUMENT

The 1992 Constitution is unambiguous about who the Chief Justice is and what s/he does. It gives him only TWO functions.

One: Article 125(4) — “The Chief Justice shall, subject to this Constitution, be the Head of the Judiciary and shall be responsible for the administration and supervision of the Judiciary.”

Two: Article 128(1) and 128(3) — He is a Justice of the Superior Courts, and presides at sittings of the Supreme Court.

That is all. Administrative head of the Judiciary. Presiding judge of the final court. Nothing more.

The Constitution deliberately walls the CJ off from the Executive and Legislature. Article 125(3) is emphatic: “…neither the President nor Parliament nor any organ or agency of the President or Parliament shall have or be given final judicial power.”

By parity of reasoning, neither shall the Judiciary be given or allowed Executive or Legislative powers. That is simple separation of powers.

So what is the Chief Justice doing electing to visit State Owned Enterprises to assess their performance? On what constitutional peg does he hang that tour?

Is an SOE a court? Is GRIDCo a division of the Judicial Service? Is COCOBOD under the supervision of the Chief Justice under Article 125(4)? Is TOR, ECG, Ghana Water Company Limited part of the Judiciary to be administered?

NO!

SOEs are creatures of statute under Article 190 and the executive arm. Their supervision belongs to the President through SIGA and sector Ministries, to Parliament through oversight, and to the Auditor-General. Not to the Chief Justice.

Therefore, the visits are untenable, unwarranted, and unconstitutional for three reasons:

1. It is Ultra Vires: It exceeds the administrative mandate of Article 125(4). Administration and supervision of the Judiciary cannot be stretched to mean inspection of executive commercial entities. That is constitutional officiousness. Nhwehwɛanimu in Twi.

2. It destroys Appearance of Independence: Article 127(1) says in the exercise of judicial power, the Judiciary shall be subject only to the Constitution and shall not be subject to control or direction of any person or authority.

When the CJ begins to tour entities which are frequent litigants before his courts, ECG sued every week, COCOBOD, GNPC in constant litigation, how does he later preside over their cases without bias? He has become an interested party. He has moved from umpire to player.

3. It is Political Work: The comments attributed to him about the past eight years and making Mahama succeed already poisoned the well. Now to follow it with tours of SOEs to lecture on their performance is to act as a Minister of State.

The Chief Justice is not a visiting efficiency consultant. The robe is not a political jersey. It gets worse when these comments are unresearched to say the least.

And this is why any further comment to defend the officiousness only adds insult to injury. It compounds the error.

Silence and retreat would be wiser than the noise making justifications, rationalisation, and equalisation. There is NO such record to equalise. Period! Let’s stop him from any further decay.

OBITER DICTA – WHERE JUDGES ARE PERMITTED TO SPEAK FREELY

Yes, judges are at liberty to make general remarks about happenings in the country. But the Constitution permits that strictly within the judicial function — in judgments, in obiter dictum.

An obiter is a remark made by the way, in passing, while deciding a live case before the court. It is not a press conference.

It is not a courtesy call. It is a permissible free expression of the judge on day to day happenings as a member of society affected by it.

Classical examples:

• Justice Jones Dotse in Woyome v. Attorney-General (2014) — “create, loot and share.” That devastating indictment of public sector rot was made inside a judgment concerning the unconstitutional payment of GH¢51m to Alfred Woyome.
• It was judicial commentary anchored to a case.
• Justice Date-Bah in Tetteh v. Mensah — on the cancer of litigation and family property.
• Justice Sowah in Tuffour v. Attorney-General (1980) — the famous dictum that a Constitution is a living organism.
• Justice Atuguba in the 2013 Election Petition — warning that “electoral fraud is not in our law.”

That is permitted. That is courage within jurisdiction. A judge sees rot exposed by evidence before him and comments in his judgment to deepen our democracy.

What is NOT permitted is for the Chief Justice to leave the courtroom, enter an SOE boardroom with cameras, and give running commentary on the economy. That is not obiter. That is obiter outside the court — officious political commentary.

If CJ Baffoe-Bonnie has views on SOEs, let him wait until an SOE matter appears before the Supreme Court, and then, in a proper ratio or obiter, tell us whether the law was obeyed.

Until then, he should stay in his constitutional lane.

The Chief Justice is Head of the Judiciary. Not Head of SOE Inspection under SIGA or its parent ministry.

Ghana shall live and NOT die in the hands of those who seek her death.

Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie said: “Pres. Mahama’s agenda is one that will benefit Ghana. We should do everything to ensure that he succeeds.”

There is absolutely nothing wrong with this statement, and here is why:

1. The President’s Success Is Ghana’s Success

John Dramani Mahama is not just National Democratic Congress (NDC) President; he is President of the Republic of Ghana. His failure is Ghana’s failure. His success is Ghana’s success.

If President John Dramani Mahama’s agenda to reset Ghana, fight corruption, create jobs and stabilise the economy succeeds, every Ghanaian benefits, including the New Patriotic Party (NPP) supporters. What kind of citizen, let alone a Chief Justice, would want the President of Ghana to fail?

2. The Chief Justice Has Freedom of Speech and a Right to Nation Building

The Chief Justice did not say “NDC must win 2028”. He did not say “vote for NDC”. He spoke about Ghana. The Constitution guarantees every Ghanaian, including Justices, the right to hold opinions on matters of national interest. Calling for collective support for a national agenda is not partisan politics; it is PATRIOTISM! We should be commending him, not condemning him.

3. Judicial Oath Does Not Mean Silence on National Development

The Judicial Oath requires Judges to be impartial in cases before them, not to be silent robots on national development. Chief Justices in other democracies comment on national progress. The Chief Justice was speaking at a nation building forum, not from the bench. He was encouraging citizens to support a development agenda that he believes will benefit Ghana. That is leadership.

4. The Hypocrisy Must Stop

When past Chief Justices made similar calls for support for government programs those now shouting today were silent. We cannot have one standard for one government and another for President Mahama’s government.

Let us be honest. President Mahama’s reset agenda is indeed for the benefit of Ghana. The Chief Justice as an eminent statesman has every right to call on all of us to support it to succeed.

Ghana first.

By Anatu Anne Seidu Bogobiri Esq., DCEO National Health Insurance Authority

We have placed all of them beneath English.

The discovery came to public attention after the Executive Secretary of the Bureau of Ghana Languages, Ebenezer Ahiator, told Parliament’s Committee on Chieftaincy, Culture and Religious Affairs that Ghana should not adopt one indigenous language as a national language.

The reason is understandable.

If we choose one Ghanaian language, speakers of the remaining languages may feel that theirs have been declared second-class citizens.

And so, in the great Ghanaian tradition of solving a quarrel between two brothers by giving the family property to the neighbour, we have apparently settled the matter.

English wins.

Nobody is offended.

Except perhaps the Ghanaian languages.

The argument has since entered Facebook, that unofficial second chamber of Parliament where every Ghanaian possesses a constituency, a microphone and an unlimited speaking time.

Within hours, the matter had ceased to be about linguistics.

It became history.

Colonialism entered.

Tribalism arrived carrying a chair.

 Politics appeared without invitation.

Then somebody mentioned Twi, and the meeting was properly constituted.

The problem with discussing a national language in Ghana is that the moment somebody proposes Twi, another person does not hear merely a language.

He hears Kumasi.

He hears Akan dominance.

He hears somebody arriving with linguistic luggage and attempting to occupy the national sitting room.

The Twi advocate, meanwhile, is equally puzzled.

He points to the market woman in Tamale bargaining with a trader from Kumasi.

He points to the trotro mate in Accra.

He points to churches, radio stations, workplaces and roadside conversations.

“Are we not already speaking it?” he asks.

This is where Ghanaian reality becomes troublesome.

A language does not always wait for Parliament to pass a law before becoming useful.

Markets have their own constitutions.

Transport stations conduct their own referenda.

Long before committees, consultants and stakeholder engagements arrive, ordinary people sometimes solve communication problems by simply opening their mouths.

Twi, in various forms, has undoubtedly acquired wide currency beyond Akan communities.

But widespread use is not the same thing as national ownership.

A goat may enter every compound in the village; that does not automatically make it the village chief.

Those who resist the elevation of one indigenous language therefore have a legitimate concern.

Ghana is not linguistically empty land waiting for the largest language group to plant a flag.

Ewe carries history.

Ga carries memory.

Dagbani carries civilisation.

Dagaare, Gonja, Nzema, Fante, Kasem, Gurene, Dangme, Likpakpaanl and many others carry entire worlds inside them.

A language is not merely a collection of words.

It is where a people store their jokes, insults, prayers, proverbs, courtship, grief and wisdom.

You cannot therefore tell a people, “Do not worry, your language is still important,” immediately after giving another language a national crown, and expect everybody to continue eating peacefully.

Our elders knew this.

When one child receives a bigger piece of meat, the other children suddenly develop advanced skills in measurement.

So the Bureau’s caution deserves respect.

But then we arrive at the uncomfortable part.

If giving special status to one Ghanaian language risks making the others feel inferior, what exactly have we been doing with English?

English occupies Parliament.

English dominates our courts.

English carries most official correspondence.

English sits at the top of the educational ladder.

English conducts job interviews.

English writes the examination that determines whether the child who speaks brilliant Gurene at home is considered academically promising.

And then, after English has occupied the best chair in the room, we tell the Ghanaian languages not to quarrel among themselves because equality is important.

There is a proverb trying desperately to be born here.

The chicken is being warned not to step on the toes of the guinea fowl while the hawk is sitting on the roof.

This is why the debate cannot simply be reduced to “Twi versus the rest.”

The bigger issue is the position of indigenous languages in Ghanaian public life.

Our Constitution itself, under Article 39(3), requires the State to foster the development of Ghanaian languages and pride in Ghanaian culture.

Parliament’s Standing Orders even allow Members to contribute in Ghanaian languages where interpretation is available.

Indeed, Speaker Alban Bagbin has publicly advocated greater use of local languages in parliamentary proceedings.

Yet anyone who has watched Parliament knows where linguistic power actually resides.

English remains the gatekeeper.

An MP may understand perfectly the anxieties of an elderly constituent in Bongo, Keta or Bekwai, but when he rises in the House to explain those anxieties, the Queen’s language, now inherited by King Charles, generally supervises proceedings.

We have therefore created a strange democracy in which citizens are encouraged to participate fully, provided the conversation eventually passes through English.

And English is not neutral merely because no Ghanaian ethnic group owns it.

It may be ethnically neutral, but it is not socially neutral.

The Ghanaian who speaks polished English often receives an immediate intellectual promotion.

The citizen struggling with English may possess acres of wisdom, but by the third grammatical accident, society has quietly reduced his academic rank.

We have all witnessed it.

A man can explain cocoa farming, rainfall patterns, soil behaviour and local economics brilliantly in his mother tongue.

Ask him to repeat the same thing before television cameras in English and suddenly people begin treating him as if the knowledge evaporated somewhere between “Good evening” and “Actually.”

We confuse language proficiency with intelligence at our peril.

Yet the answer cannot simply be to replace English with Twi tomorrow morning and declare the matter settled before lunch.

That would merely exchange one form of linguistic anxiety for another.

Other countries have found different arrangements.

Some maintain an international language while elevating one indigenous language as a national unifier.

Others recognise several official languages.

Some build multilingual systems around regions, education and government services.

Ghana does not need to photocopy Kenya, Tanzania or South Africa.

But neither must we behave as though the only available options are English forever or tribal war by Friday.

Perhaps the real national conversation should begin elsewhere.

What do we want a national language to achieve?

Identity?

Administrative convenience?

Access to government?

Education?

National unity?

Cultural preservation?

Once we answer that question, we may discover that “Which single language should defeat all the others?” was the wrong examination question from the beginning.

Perhaps English can remain an important international and administrative language while Ghana deliberately creates greater national space for several indigenous languages.

Perhaps Parliament should invest seriously in interpretation.

Perhaps government communication should routinely appear in major Ghanaian languages.

Perhaps our children should leave school able to read and write at least one Ghanaian language with the same confidence with which we celebrate their English.

Perhaps speaking impeccable English while being unable to write three correct sentences in your mother tongue should no longer be regarded automatically as evidence of educational progress.

There is something slightly unsettling about a country becoming fluent in everybody else’s language while gradually losing confidence in its own voices.

The Bureau of Ghana Languages is right about one thing.

No Ghanaian language should be allowed to die.

But languages do not die only because another indigenous language becomes dominant.

They also die from neglect.

They die when parents stop speaking them to children.

They die when schools treat them as educational side dishes.

They die when public officials use them only during election campaigns.

They die when educated people begin apologising before speaking them.

And they certainly do not grow stronger merely because English has been appointed neutral referee.

So by all means, let us protect every Ghanaian language from feeling inferior.

But while we are arranging the chairs carefully so that Twi does not sit above Ewe, Ga does not sit above Dagbani and Fante does not offend Nzema, perhaps somebody should look towards the head of the table.

English has been sitting there quietly for a very long time.

And judging by the current debate, it has even convinced us that it is not sitting there at all.

It appears to denigrate the performance of state institutions under the tenure of former President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo by wading into an unnecessary and controversial comparison of his administration and the current happenings regarding the performance of State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs).

There is absolutely nothing wrong with commending a state institution for good performance in executing its mandate.

What is particularly troubling, however, is when such commendation is wrapped in a political narrative that does not withstand basic factual scrutiny.

The Chief Justice said, and I quote, “I must congratulate you. I mean, you have done marvelously well. Sometimes, when we hear about the things that you have done and the things that some organisations are doing now, we wonder. Some of us keep wondering what we really have been doing in the past eight years.”

MIIF was established by former President Akufo-Addo through an Act of Parliament (Act 978) in 2018 and became fully operational around 2019/2020. The President assented to the Act on December 3, 2018.

So how can an institution that itself has not existed for eight years be presented as evidence that the previous eight years amounted to being wasteful and doing virtually nothing?

The mathematics alone exposes the logical bankruptcy of this narrative. You cannot benchmark eight years of performance against an institution that has only been operational for about half that period.

The Fund was already a highly profitable and self-sustaining institution from its earliest years. Its impressive financial performance did not magically emerge with the change of government.

By 2023, MIIF had already recorded a net profit of GH¢409 million, almost doubling the GH¢205 million it made in 2022.

The Fund’s revenue also saw a significant boost, climbing from GH¢323 million in 2022 to GH¢456 million in 2023. Assets Under Management grew from approximately US$125 million in October 2021 to reach the one-billion-dollar mark by January 2024.

This was not a fund that was sleeping. This was a fund that was already on a remarkable growth trajectory under the very administration the Chief Justice now seems to dismiss.

According to MIIF’s audited accounts, the Fund recorded an overwhelming GH¢1.904 billion in net profit in 2024, making it the highest-earning State-Owned Enterprise (SOE) for that year.

Its profit even surpassed those of almost every commercial bank in Ghana, with GCB and Ecobank among the exceptions.

The 2024 results were nothing short of historic. The Fund posted GH¢1.964 billion in net income, almost 300% higher than the previous year’s GH¢455 million.

Total assets rose to GH¢11.2 billion, while the Fund maintained a cost-to-income ratio of just 3%, far below global sovereign wealth fund standards. Cash reserves reached a record GH¢5.58 billion, a 69% increase from 2023.

The Auditor-General described MIIF as a “high-performing sovereign minerals fund” with strengthened revenue streams, investment growth, and balance sheet resilience.

The 2024 profit of GH¢1.904 billion exceeded the combined profits of all preceding years since MIIF’s operationalisation in 2018.

That is hardly evidence of an institution that had been neglected or poorly managed for eight years. On the contrary, it is evidence of meticulous building, strategic investment, and disciplined execution all under the previous administration.

After the current government assumed office in 2025, MIIF’s net profit reportedly fell significantly to approximately GH¢1.1 billion.

The result was fundamentally shaped by amendments to the Minerals Income Investment Fund Act, 2018 (Act 978), as effected by the Minerals Income Investment Fund (Amendment) Act, 2025 (Act 1137).

This amendment drastically reduced the Fund’s allocation of minerals royalties and dividends income from 77.6% and 100% respectively in 2024 to just 2% in 2025—a reduction of more than 98 percentage points in a single year.

So, if the numbers are the basis for judgment, then the strongest financial performance cited above occurred before the current government came into office, not after.

The Fund that the Chief Justice is celebrating today delivered its most spectacular results under the very leadership he appears to be questioning.

Was he simply praising a successful state institution, or was he also endorsing a political narrative favourable to the government of the day?

The question becomes even more legitimate given the political sensitivity surrounding appointments associated with his tenure, including the appointment of his wife as Director-General of the Ghana Prisons Service.

The Chief Justice occupies one of the most important constitutional offices in the Republic. The holder of that office must not only be impartial but must also be seen by the public to be impartial. The Judiciary’s independence is not merely a legal principle; it is the bedrock upon which public confidence in our democratic institutions rests.

When the country’s topmost judicial officer appears to be making statements that can easily be interpreted as partisan political commentary, it inevitably undermines public confidence in the neutrality of the judiciary. The Chief Justice’s comments made during a visit to MIIF on September 2, 2026 have already generated significant debate precisely because of the constitutional position he occupies and the Judiciary’s obligation to maintain independence from the executive and political parties.

His remarks about SSNIT preparing to sell its prized assets like the Labadi Beach Hotel further reinforced the impression of an implicit comparison between the present administration and the previous eight-year period under the New Patriotic Party (NPP).

We cannot have a situation where political propaganda is presented as facts simply because it comes from a person occupying a high constitutional office.
The numbers are available. The records are available. And the sequence is clear.

MIIF’s impressive performance did not begin with the current government. If anything, its reported record profit came in 2024, before the change of government.

The Fund was established by the Akufo-Addo administration. It was nurtured into one of the country’s most profitable state entities under that same administration.

Its most spectacular financial year 2024 occurred under that administration. And the profit drop in 2025 occurred after the change of government, partly due to legislative amendments that reduced the Fund’s royalty share from 77.6% to just 2%.

· Why rewrite the history of an institution that the previous administration established and nurtured into one of the country’s most profitable state entities?
· How did we get to a point where the Chief Justice himself appears to be participating in a political narrative?
· Where is the judicial impartiality that the Constitution demands and that Ghanaians deserve?

Ghanaians deserve institutions that speak the truth, not institutions that help manufacture political mythology.

The Chief Justice must remember that his words carry immense weight. When he speaks, the nation listens and interprets. His comments must never give the impression that the highest court in the land has taken sides in the political contest of ideas.

We call on the Chief Justice to focus on the administration of justice and leave political commentary to politicians.

Facts over propaganda. Records over rhetoric. Truth over politics

For a moment, Maryland became an extension of Kumasi.

The magnificent display of Asante culture, the procession of chiefs and queen mothers, and the gathering of Ghanaians and Africans in the diaspora were undoubtedly spectacular. At the centre of it all sat His Majesty Otumfuo Osei Tutu II, Asantehene, occupant of the Golden Stool and embodiment of an institution whose roots stretch centuries into African history.

Akwasidae may have provided the cultural heartbeat of the journey, but what unfolded around it was considerably grander. From the halls of Howard University to discussions on investment and partnerships between Ghanaian and American universities, as well as visits to institutions of faith and heritage, Otumfuo’s engagements in the United States showed how traditional leadership can still play an important role in today’s world.

His visit demonstrated that culture can build relationships, open doors, and connect people across borders. More importantly, it showed that African traditional institutions do not have to leave their history and customs behind to remain relevant in the modern world. On the contrary, history and cultural authority can themselves become powerful resources for negotiating the future.

Diplomacy has traditionally been understood as the preserve of governments: presidents travel with foreign ministers, ambassadors negotiate between states, and governments sign treaties. Otumfuo’s visit to the United States shows how international relations are changing. Today, influence is not built only through political and economic power; culture and traditional heritage can also bring people and nations together.

At Howard University, which itself was a meaningful choice of venue, Otumfuo delivered an important and powerful address. Howard University has occupied a distinguished place in the intellectual and political history of people of African descent. Its Moorland-Spingarn Research Center holds one of the world’s most important collections documenting the global Black experience, including the papers of Ghana’s first President, Osagyefo Dr Kwame Nkrumah.

The Asantehene’s presence at the library was an encounter between two enduring institutions of Black history: an African traditional kingdom whose political origins predate the modern Ghanaian state, and an American university deeply connected to the intellectual emancipation of people of African descent.

Otumfuo used the occasion to call for stronger relationships between Ghana and the global African diaspora. For decades, Africa’s relationship with its diaspora has been framed largely through the emotional vocabulary of “return home.” That connection remains important, but Otumfuo’s message suggests the next stage must move from sentiment to structure.

The significance of Howard, therefore, was not simply that a king had spoken at a university, but that a traditional ruler had used one of the most important intellectual platforms to articulate a contemporary vision of African-diaspora partnership.

At the Africa Business Investment Summit, held at MGM National Harbor on August 27 and 28, Otumfuo stood before investors, policymakers, and members of the diaspora to confront one of the most persistent contradictions of the African story: a continent rich in natural resources, human potential, and cultural capital, yet one where large portions of its population still live without the prosperity those resources should afford.

Challenging the old narrative, he invited investors to see Africa as a continent of opportunity, urging them to do more than simply move capital. Investment, he argued, should build human capacity, create employment, support industrialisation, and leave footprints that outlast the financial statements.

Another important chapter of the visit unfolded through higher education. On August 27, Virginia State University formalised a partnership with the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST), and Otumfuo took part in the signing as Chancellor of KNUST. The memorandum establishes opportunities for student and faculty exchange, collaborative research, and cross-cultural learning.

Education has remained one of the defining pillars of Otumfuo’s leadership since his installation. His initiatives and chancellorship reflect a long-standing conviction that the future of Asanteman and Ghana is inseparable from the development of human capital. What America witnessed was not a departure from his traditional role but an extension of it.

Otumfuo’s meeting with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce further highlighted the economic side of his visit. The meeting created an opportunity for discussions on strengthening business relations, attracting investment to Ghana and Africa, and building stronger links between American businesses and African opportunities.

His presence in such a setting was significant, as had been long attested to by former presidents of Ghana. It showed that the influence of traditional leadership can extend beyond culture and ceremony into conversations about trade, investment, and economic development. It again demonstrated how the goodwill and international respect attached to the Asantehene can help open doors for partnerships that could benefit not only Asanteman, but Ghana and Africa as a whole.

At first glance, the visit to the Museum of the Bible in Washington, D.C., might appear peripheral. Yet Asante culture is sustained through a sophisticated architecture of memory: oral histories, court poetry (kwadwom), festivals, royal regalia, and ritual.

Akwasidae is itself an institution of remembrance, connecting the living to their ancestors and reminding society that identity is inherited and transmitted, not created afresh by every generation.

As Otumfuo himself put it, “Culture is not the dead object to be placed behind glass. It is a living inheritance that must be understood, practiced, questioned, renewed, and transmitted.”

Museums, too, are custodians of collective memory, and the encounter raises a wider question for Africans: how effectively are we preserving and presenting our own historical memory to the world?

And then came the Grand Akwasidae at Bowie State University.

The drums, different shades of kente, umbrellas, and traditional ceremonies were more than a beautiful display. Together, they told the story of Asante history and culture more powerfully than speeches could.

Years from now, photographs of the 2026 Akwasidae in Maryland will remind us of a truly historic occasion: the colourful display, the chiefs and queen mothers, the sound of the drums, and Otumfuo sitting in state as thousands gathered to celebrate Asante culture.

It will also be remembered for Otumfuo’s lecture at Howard University, his discussions on investment, the partnerships between Ghanaian and American universities, and his engagement with the African diaspora.

Above all, the visit showed that an African traditional ruler can remain deeply rooted in culture and tradition while still helping to shape the future.

Otumfuo did not simply take Akwasidae to America. He carried with him a story about what Africa has been, what Africa is, and what it might yet become, demonstrating that authority inherited from the past can serve the future.

When the final Fontomfrom drum sounded in Maryland, and the 2026 Akwasidae entered history, perhaps its most important legacy was not that Asanteman had temporarily come to America, but that Asanteman had shown the world how culture itself can become diplomacy.

Sources close to the sector say manufacturers are preparing to introduce a “Clinker Demurrage Surcharge” of around GH¢12 per bag.

The move follows months of escalating, unbudgeted operational losses tied to severe congestion at Tema Port. The industry estimates these costs have reached a shocking US$45 to US$50 million this year alone.

The core issue stems from extended waiting times at anchorage. Clinker, the key raw material required for cement production, took around seven days to clear port at the beginning of the year. That wait has since ballooned to 40 days.

To make matters worse, daily vessel demurrage rates have risen to approximately US$27,000 per day. A single vessel sitting idle for 40 days racks up over US$1 million in penalty fees before offloading a single tonne.

The challenge is more than just financial. With clinker taking 35 days to travel from China and another 35 to 40 days waiting at Tema, the supply cycle is stretching toward three months. That extended lead time creates a structural bottleneck if port congestion persists.

So who pays?

The industry emphasizes that the upcoming GH¢12 addition is not a standard price increase. Instead, it is being structured as a temporary, direct pass-through surcharge, itemized separately on invoices and subject to quarterly review.

If port clearance times normalize, the surcharge can be adjusted downwards or removed completely.

Beyond the GH¢12 adjustment, industry stakeholders are appealing for broader inter-agency collaboration to resolve the port bottleneck.

The substantial demurrage fees currently being incurred represent a significant drain on foreign exchange, capital flowing directly to international ship owners lines instead of circulating within the Ghanaian economy.

Manufacturers acknowledge ongoing discussions with key government stakeholders, including the Ministries of Trade, Agribusiness and Industry and Transport, but emphasize that port infrastructure and berthing availability remain severely constrained.

Industry players point to potential relief solutions, such as optimizing access to Berths 10 and 11, which could immediately help clear the vessel backlog.

The core message from Ghana’s cement makers is collaborative: addressing port congestion will eliminate the demurrage burden and the need for the surcharge.

Until those port operations are streamlined, however, the industry faces the financial reality of passing on the cost of prolonged offshore delays.

“A total of GHC9.5 million will be paid to clubs,” he added.

The declaration was one of the headline moments during the 32nd Ordinary Congress at the Ghanaman Soccer of Excellence at Prampram as the GFA outlined its financial support package ahead of the 2026/27 Ghana Premier League season.

The announcement follows a similar intervention before the start of the 2025/26 campaign when the government, through a strategic partnership involving the GFA and Adesa Productions Limited (APL), provided GHC1 million to each Premier League club. The initiative was announced by Chief of Staff Julius Debrah and was widely welcomed by clubs struggling with the rising cost of participation in the domestic game.

Let me be clear: there is nothing wrong with government support for football. However, I have always maintained that the Ghana Premier League must eventually become self-sustaining and capable of generating enough revenue to support its stakeholders.

More importantly, it is difficult to justify continuous government investment in a football product that offers little or no measurable return. That is why many observers have described the intervention as more of a corporate social responsibility exercise than a commercial investment.

While the financial support provides welcome relief for clubs, it also highlights a much bigger issue — the continued failure of the Ghana Football Association to secure a headline sponsor for its flagship competition.

Seven years without a headline sponsor

Kurt Okraku is now in his second term as GFA president and has spent nearly seven years at the helm of Ghana football. Yet one of the most significant shortcomings of his administration remains the inability to attract a major sponsor for the Ghana Premier League.

This is particularly concerning because corporate entities continue to invest heavily in Ghana football, especially in the various national teams, including the Black Stars.

Historically, the league has not struggled to attract sponsors. Under previous administrations, companies such as Kinapharma, Ghana Telecom, OneTouch, Globacom, First Capital Plus Bank and Zylofon Cash all served as headline sponsors at different periods.

The most lucrative of those agreements came from Globacom, which committed approximately $15 million over five years — about $3 million annually — before the partnership was terminated.

More recently, betting company betPawa entered into a three-year sponsorship agreement reportedly worth $6 million in 2022. However, the arrangement ended prematurely, with the company eventually opting to focus on locker-room bonus payments to players.

The abrupt collapse of that partnership raised several questions, many of which remain unanswered.

For any company to commit millions of dollars to a football product, there must have been confidence in its potential. Equally, when such a company chooses to walk away before the expiration of its agreement, it inevitably raises concerns about the attractiveness and long-term viability of the product.

Persistent challenges continue to hurt the product

The Ghana Premier League continues to face numerous challenges.

Concerns over declining fan interest, inadequate marketing, allegations of match manipulation, poor officiating, substandard playing surfaces, governance issues and a perceived decline in playing quality have all been raised repeatedly by supporters, journalists and industry stakeholders.

What has frustrated many observers is the perception that football authorities have often appeared more willing to defend the status quo than to confront these issues head-on.

These concerns directly affect the commercial appeal of the league and make it more difficult to attract corporate investment.

About a month ago, I watched Godfred Akoto Boafo, a senior sports journalist and now a football club owner, talk to Kafui Dey and openly declared that he does not watch the Ghana Premier League and does not remember the last time he watched a Premier League game.

I was perplexed and disappointed to hear those remarks from a club owner; likewise, Kafui Dey. As a club owner, you expect him to be interested in the topflight, but it did not turn out to be so.

Financial relief for clubs

Despite the broader concerns, the latest financial package has been warmly received by clubs.

Aduana FC Chief Executive Officer Collins Atta Poku described the support as potentially transformative.

“I would say this is the single most significant and transformative declaration by the FA president in his entire tenure. Now, there has to be consistency,” he said.

“Clubs received the money last season, but coming here today, we were not even certain another support package would be announced.”

“Putting one million Ghana cedis directly into the accounts of 18 Premier League clubs is very significant. It takes away part of the burden that clubs face.”

“For Aduana, about a third of our budget could be covered by that amount. It is significant.”

His comments reflect the reality faced by many Ghanaian clubs, most of which operate under severe financial constraints.

Kofi Adams asks the difficult questions

Before the financial package was announced by Mr Okraku, the Sports and Recreation Minister Kofi Adams raised critical questions that strike at the heart of the league’s long-term challenges.

“The new Ghana Premier League season is about to start. Who exactly are we asking Ghanaians to come and watch?” he asked.

“Who is the star? Who is the player every child is talking about? Whose jersey do young supporters want to buy? Who is the personality on the billboard?”

The minister questioned whether clubs and football administrators have done enough to market the league’s talent.

“There was a time when Charles Taylor was an attraction. Dong Bortey was an attraction. Ishmael Addo and Stephen Oduro were attractions. Supporters knew the characters of the league. They were heroes. The rivalries were deep and the personalities were identifiable.”

“Today, there are more media platforms than we had in the past. There are more opportunities to market players, but who are they and where are they? Why are we hiding them? Or have we not been able to produce them?”

His remarks highlighted a key issue: football is not only about competition; it is also about personalities, narratives and entertainment value.

Adams further stressed the need for a deliberate player-development strategy.

“The world has changed. Talent identification is deliberate. Coaching is deliberate. Sports science is deliberate. Competition exposure is deliberate. Player data is deliberate. Transition is deliberate. Everything is deliberate.”

“We cannot compete with deliberate systems through hope.”

Those comments represent some of the most important questions currently facing Ghana football.

Can the Premier League survive on government support alone?

The reality is that government support, while appreciated, cannot become the foundation of the Ghana Premier League’s financial model.

Governments change. Priorities change. Economic conditions change.

If a future administration decides not to continue the support package, what becomes of the clubs?

That uncertainty makes the search for a headline sponsor even more urgent.

Over the years, several GFA officials, including Vice President Mark Addo, Executive Council member Nana Oduro Sarfo and Head of Public Relations Strategy Neil Armstrong-Mortagbe, have spoken publicly about ongoing negotiations with potential sponsors.

Yet despite the assurances, no headline sponsorship agreement has materialised.

A defining challenge for the Okraku administration

As Kurt Okraku considers seeking a third term as GFA president following the recent approval of constitutional amendments, securing a major sponsor for the Ghana Premier League may ultimately become one of the defining measures of his administration’s success.

Financial support from government can help clubs survive, but sponsorship, marketing, improved officiating, stronger governance and increased fan engagement are what will help the league thrive.

The Ghana Premier League is currently ranked 100th in the world and 14th in Africa by the International Federation of Football History and Statistics (IFFHS). Those rankings underline the work that remains to be done if the competition is to regain its standing and attract sustained corporate investment.

As the 2026/27 season gets underway, clubs can take encouragement from the financial support available to them, but one question continues to linger over Ghana’s top flight:

When will the Ghana Premier League secure a headline sponsor once again?

Until that question is answered, the league’s long-term sustainability will remain uncertain, regardless of the welcome financial interventions being provided today.

And as the new season begins, one can only hope that the eventual champions will be determined by events on the pitch and not by the influence of those who wield power behind the scenes.

Follow-up and Socials:

Email: appiahsamuelkow@gmail.com

X – @amoasi_ekow

Facebook: Samuel Ekow Amoasi Appiah

Upon hearing of the case in the media, such a party can enter an appearance and participate in the case. Alternatively, the party can instruct his lawyers to undertake, in writing, to accept service and file his defence. Hiding behind non-service, particularly when one’s own actions have made service difficult or impracticable, is a cowardly act of running away from the allegations he has made.

I make this claim based on the reasons below:

Commencing Civil Action in Ghana

Generally, in Ghana, civil proceedings are commenced by the filing of a writ of summons in court and the service of the writ on the person who is required to respond to the claims stated in the statement of claim that accompanies the writ. This is subject to any existing enactment to the contrary, as the law provides three main means by which an action can be commenced in court. They are: an originating motion on notice, a petition, and the issuance of a writ of summons (commonly known and referred to simply as a “writ”). Where an enactment sets out a procedure for invoking the jurisdiction of the court, a party is expected to comply with that method. (See YAW ANING BOADU V. GHANA LAW SOCIETY AND OTHERS, SUIT NO. GJ/0348/2026, per His Lordship Isaac Addo J., quoting with approval the time-tested position of the courts in BOYEFIO V. NTHC PROPERTIES LIMITED [1996–97] SCGLR 531.)

Service

Following the issuance of the writ, the writ is to be served on the party against whom it has been issued. The Rules of Court provide for several means by which a writ can be served. The HIGH COURT (CIVIL PROCEDURE) RULES, 2004 (C.I. 47), together with its various amendments, which regulate civil proceedings in the High Court and the Circuit Courts, contain various provisions on how service is to be made. For instance, Order 5 Rule 9 provides for the means by which a person with a disability can be served. Order 7 provides for service of process generally, while Order 8 provides for service out of the jurisdiction (i.e., outside Ghana).

Who Can Serve?

Order 7 Rule 1 provides that a document which is required to be served on a person shall be served by a bailiff of the court or a process server registered with the court. At common law, a bailiff is a court officer who assists the court, ensures courtroom security, and serves processes on parties. The object of service is to bring to the notice of an affected party the institution or pendency of court proceedings. Since it is the court that needs to bring to the attention of a party that an action has been instituted against him, the party who instituted the action is generally not involved in the process of service. However, the rules in Order 7, Rule 1 of C.I. 47 allow such a party to direct service.

Importance of Service

Service is fundamental to court processes, and non-service goes to the root of jurisdiction. In FRIESLAND FRICO DOMO ALIAS FRIESLAND FOODS BV V. DACHEL CO. LTD [2012] 1 SCGLR, the Supreme Court, quoting with approval the decision in REPUBLIC V. HIGH COURT, ACCRA; EX PARTE ALLGATE CO. LTD (AMALGAMATED BANK, INTERESTED PARTY) [2007–2008] SCGLR 1041, explained that non-service implies that audi alteram partem, the rule of natural justice, is breached. This is fundamental and goes to jurisdiction. Thus, a court generally has no jurisdiction to proceed with a case if the other party has not been served.

Who Can Be Served

The rules make provision for different persons to be served based on the nature of the case:

1. Personal Service: Generally, a document is to be served personally on a person who is required to be served. This is the first crucial step after a writ or any process initiating a legal action has been issued. This is done by leaving a duplicate or attested copy of the document with the person to be served. Where personal service is hindered by violence, threats or other acts of obstruction by that person or any other person with or under that person, such as a bodyguard, it shall be sufficient for the bailiff to leave the document as near that person as may be practicable.

2. Electronic Service: Pursuant to the 2020 amendment of C.I. 47, ORDER 7 RULE 3A OF C.I. 47, AS AMENDED BY C.I. 133, allows for electronic service of processes. However, this is subject to specific rules. These include the fact that a party who initiates an action shall, at the time of the initiation of the action or filing of the appearance or proceedings, clearly state that he would want service of processes to be done by electronic means. Such a person shall provide his telephone number and electronic mail address. The service through electronic means can be done either by a bailiff, a process server or a party to the case. However, where the service is by a party, that party shall deliver a hard copy of the process to the registrar of the court for verification only.

Since a party has to specifically ask for processes to be served on him electronically, where a party had earlier asked that all processes be served personally but subsequently wants the processes to be served electronically, he would have to notify the registrar of the court.

3. A Lawyer: A lawyer for a party may undertake to accept service. In such a case, the lawyer undertakes, in writing, to accept the writ on behalf of the party. The writ shall, therefore, be deemed to have been duly served on the defendant when it is served on the lawyer.

In TRUSTEESHIP SYNAGOGUE CHURCH OF ALL NATIONS V. AGYEMAN [2010] SCGLR 717, the Supreme Court explained that, normally, when service has to be effected on someone, such service has to be personal. However, such necessity has been qualified to mean that service on the agent put forth by the person in question for the purpose of service is good service.

Acquah JSC (as he then was) explained it clearly in BARCLAYS BANK OF GHANA LTD V. GHANA CABLE CO. LTD [1998–1999] 1 that the first crucial step after a writ of summons or any process initiating a legal action has been issued is for the defendant to be served personally with a copy thereof or notice of the said writ, if permissible, unless the solicitors of the defendant undertake in writing to accept service on behalf of the defendant.

4. Company: In the case of a corporate body, an enactment may provide for the means by which service is to be effected. Where no such provision is made in an enactment, service may be effected by serving it on the chairman, president or other head of the body, or on the managing director, company secretary, treasurer or other similar officer of the company.

5. Stool/Skin: Service on a stool or skin may be effected by serving it on the occupant of the stool or skin or any secretary, clerk or linguist of that stool or skin. Where the stool is vacant, service may be effected by serving it on the regent or caretaker of that stool or skin.

6. Family: Service on a family constituted by customary law may be effected by serving it on the head of the family or any principal member of the family who is, or is acting as, a caretaker of any property of that family, or a principal member of the family.

7. Prison/Police/BNI/EOCO Officers: For a person who is in prison or detention, service may be effected by serving it on any person apparently in charge of the prison or the place of detention, such as a police officer, a BNI officer or an EOCO officer at a police station, BNI office or EOCO office. If, however, access cannot readily be had to the person apparently in charge of the prison or place of detention, service may be effected on any warder, guard or similar officer of that prison or place of detention.

8. MDA: Service on a Minister of State in his capacity as such, or on a ministry or government department, may be effected by serving it on the administrative head of that ministry or department.

9. Attorney-General: SECTION 12 OF THE STATE PROCEEDINGS ACT also provides that documents required to be served on the State for the purpose of, or in connection with, civil proceedings by or against the State shall be delivered at the office of the Attorney-General, to a representative of the Attorney-General in any part of the country, or to any office specified under any law.

10. Parent/Guardian: A process to be served on a person with a disability shall be deemed to have been duly served if served on the father, mother or guardian of the person, or the person with whom the person with disability resides or under whose care the person is. This is provided by ORDER 5, RULE 9 OF C.I. 47.

A person with disability in this context is not used in the general terms as defined by the Persons with Disability Act, 2006 (Act 715). A person with disability in this context means a person under the age of 18 years or a person who is certified by a medical officer to be incapable of managing and administering his or her property and affairs by reason of mental disorder or infirmity of mind.

Substituted Service

Where it becomes difficult to serve a person personally, a party may, with the permission of the court, seek to effect service through other means, such as publication in the newspapers. This option becomes available where three or more attempts have been made without success to effect personal service and any further attempt to effect personal service may result in undue delay, or it is otherwise impracticable, for any reason, to serve the document personally.

This is the means of last resort where personal service is unsuccessful or impracticable. In DAKAR LTD V. INDUSTRIAL CHEMICAL AND PHARMACEUTICAL CO. LTD AND ANOTHER [1981] GLR 461, Taylor JSC, as he then was, explained that substituted service is ordered when personal service is unsuccessful, not when it is impossible.

Is Service a Necessity?

While service goes to the jurisdiction of the case, the Rules of Court make provision for service to be dispensed with. A party who truly believes in his case, upon hearing that a writ has been issued against him, will not wait to be served. ORDER 7 RULE 12(3) provides that where a writ is NOT duly served on a defendant but the defendant files an unconditional appearance, the writ shall be deemed to have been duly served on the defendant and to have been served on the date on which the defendant filed the appearance.

Atuguba JSC explained this in the BARCLAYS BANK case when he noted at page 22 that the object of service is merely to bring to the notice of an affected party the institution or pendency of court proceedings. If, therefore, a party, without actual service, nonetheless deliberately participates in the unserved proceedings, he should be bound by them.

Conclusion

Thus, while service is crucial to proceedings in court, a person who truly believes in his allegations against an individual and truly seeks his day in court could, upon hearing of the case in the media, enter an appearance and participate in the case. Alternatively, the party can instruct his lawyers to undertake, in writing, to accept service and file his defence.

Hiding behind non-service, particularly when one’s own actions have made service difficult or impracticable, is a cowardly act of running away from the issues. While the option of substituted service is available, a party who truly believes in the allegations he has made in the media and who hears of a legal suit against him through the same media should be able to muster the courage to enter an appearance and participate in the case without waiting to be served.

It is, however, argued that a party who truly believes in his allegations against an individual and seeks his day in court does not necessarily need to wait to be served with court processes before taking up the challenge and facing his opponent in court.

Upon hearing of the case in the media, such a party can enter an appearance and participate in the case.

Alternatively, the party can instruct his lawyers to undertake, in writing, to accept service and file his defence.

Hiding behind non-service, particularly when one’s own actions have made service difficult or impracticable, is a cowardly act of running away from the allegations he has made.

I make this claim based on the reasons below:
Commencing Civil Action in Ghana.
Generally, in Ghana, civil proceedings are commenced by the filing of a writ of summons in court and the service of the writ on the person who is required to respond to the claims stated in the statement of claim that accompanies the writ.

This is subject to any existing enactment to the contrary as the law provides three main means by which an action can be commenced in court.

They are: an originating motion on notice, a petition, and the issuance of a writ of summons (commonly known and referred to simply as a “writ”). Where an enactment sets out a procedure for invoking the jurisdiction of the court, a party is expected to comply with that method.

(See YAW ANING BOADU V. GHANA LAW SOCIETY AND OTHERS, SUIT NO. GJ/0348/2026, per His Lordship Isaac Addo J., quoting with approval the time-tested position of the courts in BOYEFIO V. NTHC PROPERTIES LIMITED [1996–97] SCGLR 531.)

Service
Following the issuance of the writ, the writ is to be served on the party against whom it has been issued.

The Rules of Court provide for several means by which a writ can be served.

The HIGH COURT (CIVIL PROCEDURE) RULES, 2004 (C.I. 47), together with its various amendments, which regulate civil proceedings in the High Court and the Circuit Courts, contain various provisions on how service is to be made.

For instance, Order 5 rule 9 provides for the means by which a person with a disability can be served. Order 7 provides for service of process generally, while Order 8 provides for service out of the jurisdiction (i.e., outside Ghana).

Who Can Serve?
Order 7 rule 1 provides that a document which is required to be served on a person shall be served by a bailiff of the court or a process server registered with the court. At common law, a bailiff is a court officer who assists the court, ensures courtroom security, and serves processes on parties.

The object of service is to bring to the notice of an affected party the institution or pendency of court proceedings.

Since it is the court that needs to bring to the attention of a party that an action has been instituted against him, the party who instituted the action is generally not involved in the process of service.

However, the rules in Order 7, Rule 1 of C.I. 47 allow such a party to direct service.

Importance of Service
Service is fundamental to court processes, and non-service goes to the root of jurisdiction.

In FRIESLAND FRICO DOMO ALIAS FRIESLAND FOODS BV V. DACHEL CO. LTD [2012] 1 SCGLR, the Supreme Court, quoting with approval the decision in REPUBLIC V. HIGH COURT, ACCRA; EX PARTE ALLGATE CO. LTD (AMALGAMATED BANK, INTERESTED PARTY) [2007–2008] SCGLR 1041, explained that non-service implies that audi alteram partem, the rule of natural justice, is breached.

This is fundamental and goes to jurisdiction. Thus, a court generally has no jurisdiction to proceed with a case if the other party has not been served.
Who Can Be Served.

The rules make provision for different persons to be served based on the nature of the case;

1. Personal Service: Generally, a document is to be served personally on a person who is required to be served. This is the first crucial step after a writ or any process initiating a legal action has been issued.

This is done by leaving a duplicate or attested copy of the document with the person to be served.

Where personal service is hindered by violence, threats or other acts of obstruction by that person or any other person with or under that person, such as a bodyguard, it shall be sufficient for the bailiff to leave the document as near that person as may be practicable.

2. Electronic Service: Pursuant to the 2020 amendment of C.I. 47, ORDER 7 RULE 3A OF C.I. 47, AS AMENDED BY C.I. 133, allows for electronic service of processes.

However, this is subject to specific rules. These include the fact that a party who initiates an action shall, at the time of the initiation of the action or filing of the appearance or proceedings, clearly state that he would want service of processes to be done by electronic means.

Such a person shall provide his telephone number and electronic mail address. The service through electronic means can be done either by a bailiff, a process server or a party to the case.

However, where the service is by a party, that party shall deliver a hard copy of the process to the registrar of the court for verification only.

Since a party has to specifically ask for processes to be served on him electronically, where a party had earlier asked that all processes be served personally but subsequently wants the processes to be served electronically, he would have to notify the registrar of the court.

3. A Lawyer: A lawyer for a party may undertake to accept service. In such a case, the lawyer undertakes, in writing, to accept the writ on behalf of the party. The writ shall, therefore, be deemed to have been duly served on the defendant when it is served on the lawyer.

In TRUSTEESHIP SYNAGOGUE CHURCH OF ALL NATIONS V. AGYEMAN [2010] SCGLR 717, the Supreme Court explained that, normally, when service has to be effected on someone, such service has to be personal.

However, such necessity has been qualified to mean that service on the agent put forth by the person in question for the purpose of service is good service.

Acquah JSC (as he then was) explained it clearly in BARCLAYS BANK OF GHANA LTD V. GHANA CABLE CO. LTD [1998–1999] 1 that the first crucial step after a writ of summons or any process initiating a legal action has been issued is for the defendant to be served personally with a copy thereof or notice of the said writ, if permissible, unless the solicitors of the defendant undertake in writing to accept service on behalf of the defendant.

4. Company: In the case of a corporate body, an enactment may provide for the means by which service is to be effected. Where no such provision is made in an enactment, service may be effected by serving it on the chairman, president or other head of the body, or on the managing director, company secretary, treasurer or other similar officer of the company.

5. Stool/Skin: Service on a stool or skin may be effected by serving it on the occupant of the stool or skin or any secretary, clerk or linguist of that stool or skin. Where the stool is vacant, service may be effected by serving it on the regent or caretaker of that stool or skin.

6. Family: Service on a family constituted by customary law may be effected by serving it on the head of the family or any principal member of the family who is, or is acting as, a caretaker of any property of that family, or a principal member of the family.

7. Prison/Police/BNI/EOCO Officers: For a person who is in prison or detention, service may be effected by serving it on any person apparently in charge of the prison or the place of detention, such as a police officer, a BNI officer or an EOCO officer at a police station, BNI office or EOCO office.

If, however, access cannot readily be had to the person apparently in charge of the prison or place of detention, service may be effected on any warder, guard or similar officer of that prison or place of detention.

8. MDA: Service on a Minister of State in his capacity as such, or on a ministry or government department, may be effected by serving it on the administrative head of that ministry or department.

9. Attorney-General: SECTION 12 OF THE STATE PROCEEDINGS ACT also provides that documents required to be served on the State for the purpose of, or in connection with, civil proceedings by or against the State shall be delivered at the office of the Attorney-General, to a representative of the Attorney-General in any part of the country, or to any office specified under any law.

10. Parent/Guardian: A process to be served on a person with disability shall be deemed to have been duly served if served on the father, mother or guardian of the person, or the person with whom the person with disability resides or under whose care the person is. This is provided by ORDER 5, RULE 9 OF C.I. 47.

A person with disability in this context is not used in the general terms as defined by the Persons with Disability Act, 2006 (Act 715).

A person with disability in this context means a person under the age of 18 years or a person who is certified by a medical officer to be incapable of managing and administering his or her property and affairs by reason of mental disorder or infirmity of mind.

Substituted Service
Where it becomes difficult to serve a person personally, a party may, with the permission of the court, seek to effect service through other means, such as publication in the newspapers.

This option becomes available where three or more attempts have been made without success to effect personal service and any further attempt to effect personal service may result in undue delay, or it is otherwise impracticable, for any reason, to serve the document personally.

This is the means of last resort where personal service is unsuccessful or impracticable.

IN DAKAR LTD V. INDUSTRIAL CHEMICAL AND PHARMACEUTICAL CO. LTD AND ANOTHER [1981] GLR 461, Taylor JSC, as he then was, explained that substituted service is ordered when personal service is unsuccessful, not when it is impossible.

Is Service a Necessity?

While service goes to the jurisdiction of the case, the Rules of Court make provision for service to be dispensed with.

A party who truly believes in his case, upon hearing that a writ has been issued against him, will not wait to be served. ORDER 7 RULE 12(3) provides that where a writ is NOT duly served on a defendant but the defendant files an unconditional appearance, the writ shall be deemed to have been duly served on the defendant and to have been served on the date on which the defendant filed the appearance.

Atuguba JSC explained this in the BARCLAYS BANK case when he noted at page 22 that the object of service is merely to bring to the notice of an affected party the institution or pendency of court proceedings.

If, therefore, a party, without actual service, nonetheless deliberately participates in the unserved proceedings, he should be bound by them.

Conclusion
Thus, while service is crucial to proceedings in court, a person who truly believes in his allegations against an individual and truly seeks his day in court could, upon hearing of the case in the media, enter an appearance and participate in the case.

Alternatively, the party can instruct his lawyers to undertake, in writing, to accept service and file his defence.

Hiding behind non-service, particularly when one’s own actions have made service difficult or impracticable, is a cowardly act of running away from the issues.

While the option of substituted service is available, a party who truly believes in the allegations he has made in the media and who hears of a legal suit against him through the same media should be able to muster the courage to enter an appearance and participate in the case without waiting to be served.

Driven by curiosity, she tried a bowl of porridge that was too hot, another was too cold, and finally one with the perfect warmth.

She went on to explore everything she could find, settled on her choice, and finally fell asleep in a cozy bed.

Goldilocks may have been meandering, but she knew clearly what was just right for her.

Today, you and I as consumers are Goldilocks.

Today’s consumer wanders through boundless markets, scrolling online, piling products into carts yet offloading them in a minute.

Although businesses are playing along with the increasing consumerism to satisfy consumers’ tastes and preferences, loyalty has become delicate than ever.

How do organisations fix this puzzle, then? And how much pursuit of the consumer is just right? Here are four critical areas I identify from my own experience as Goldilocks, who is spoilt for choice yet gets easily overwhelmed and withdraws loyalty.

1. Innovation: Companies are fighting for consumer attention with the belief that innovation gives them an edge. This is rightly so because Goldilocks gets easily bored and has the tendency to go a-wandering.

Innovation however, can feel too new, if we will admit. Research shows that when innovation exceeds a certain percentage of novelty, it becomes difficult for consumers to adapt. They simply cannot keep up. Sometimes, innovation leads to products becoming complicated and confusing.

To curb this, businesses should consider their target demography. A key question to ask is about the adaptation capacity of the target customer? Do early adopters or laggards dominate? Younger people tend to adapt more easily while older folks have their lifestyles formed already, making change more difficult.

We saw how it took time for Generation X and baby boomers to get accustomed to ride-hailing services due to their relatively low-tech savviness, but when they began to appreciate its safety and convenience, they were driven to jump on.

The value of innovation must be communicated; otherwise, new can feel like too much work and old can be boring.

2. Digitalisation: Everything is becoming digital and everything is becoming rigid. We have moved from in-person customer service to automated systems and AI bots.

This can be great when it works, but wait till you have a complex problem as a customer, it becomes terrifying. I once bought a book on Amazon and was mistakenly debited for one that never appeared in my Kindle.

The refund process was so cumbersome and automated that there was no human face to help me. I felt drowned in a system that could not understand my problem. Customer problems do not always fit neatly into automated categories.

When digitalisation replaces human interaction completely, customer issues remain unresolved. People are becoming exhausted by this.

The Goldilocks consumer wants a level of digitalisation for routine tasks, but they also want a human being who can understand when things go wrong. There was a time I booked a hotel in Morrocco via Booking.com but could not make the trip.

I cancelled in time, but my account was deducted anyway. The automation made it difficult to stop the deduction. I eventually called the hotel and was met with a Moroccan accent that claimed they were entitled to my first night fee.

Some organisations are taking advantage of digitalisation and automated systems to make things easier for them, not customers.

3. Pricing: What pricing is right for what product or service? I have seen a disturbing trend on the Ghanaian market. So-called bougie brands overprice yet underdeliver, creating low industry standards.

Businesses are becoming entitled to outrageous pricing to create exclusivity, while Goldilocks is becoming less and less satisfied.

They are fond of charging premium rates for average quality in Ghana. I have had my share of such experiences with specifically “high-class” salons and restaurants. Exorbitant prices yet you enter and no one attends to you for a good fifteen minutes.

High prices raise consumer expectations, making them feel cheated when the organisation does not match up. On the other hand, organisations sometimes underprice just to attract customers, but it cannot sustain their business.

They make losses and eventually compromise the quality of their service or products. This hurts everyone. Pricing should be based on the value you actually deliver. Differentiation or cost leadership.

Be clear about your target market and understand what that market can afford. Set a price range that is just right for that specific consumer segment, without compromising your profits or the quality of what you offer. When consumers feel they are getting fair value, they stay.

4. Sales: Businesses are competing for Goldilocks. They chase her everywhere. At what point does the pitching and selling become too much? Insurance agents seem to be the most notorious, pursuing the prospects constantly.

On some occasions, I have been pushed into showing disinterest to relieve me of the pressure. On Facebook, you may have also experienced clicking a link and suddenly being funnelled into WhatsApp to place an order before you are ready. At times a beep on your phone turns out to be the dental clinic you visited; it’s their daily texts again, you thought it was a bank alert.

Eventually we find ourselves blocking these companies or marking their emails as spam. We unsubscribe from everything. The very attention they were chasing is lost forever. Moderation is key, once a month is considerable.

Goldilock’s time and inbox deserve courtesy. Sales outreach should add value, not interrupt life. When a customer feels stalked, they run away.

Finally, today’s consumer is aware of alternatives and gives loyalty reluctantly. Businesses feel the immense pressure to win Goldilocks over, but more often than not, they do not know when they are doing the most or not trying at all.

Although stingy with her loyalty, all that Goldilocks wants is a chair that will not break, a bowl of warm porridge, a cozy bed and a brand that pays attention to how much is just right.

About Author:

Sangmorkuor Tetteh, PhD

Lecturer, University of Professional Studies, Accra

Strategy Consultant & Corporate Trainer

Email: sangmorkuor.tetteh@upsamail.edu.gh

For many Ghanaians, the mention of GH¢21.89 billion in connection with the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme (DGPP) naturally raises concern. At a time when households are still recovering from economic hardship, inflation, currency depreciation and high interest rates, any reference to a multibillion-cedi “loss” can understandably cause anxiety.

But economics cannot be understood through headlines alone. To properly appreciate what has happened, we must ask: What exactly does the GH¢21.89 billion represent? Was that amount actually lost in cash? What did Ghana receive in return? Why was gold purchased at market prices? And what has the programme contributed to the wider economy?

The answers present a much more nuanced picture.

The challenge Ghana was trying to solve

Ghana’s economic vulnerabilities did not begin with the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme. One longstanding challenge has been the country’s need for foreign exchange.

Ghana imports fuel, machinery, pharmaceuticals, industrial inputs, vehicles and technology. These imports require dollars and other foreign currencies. When demand for foreign exchange persistently exceeds supply, pressure builds on the cedi.

A weaker cedi makes imports more expensive, and those costs eventually find their way into transportation, food, manufacturing and household expenditure. This is why exchange-rate stability is not merely an issue for economists; it directly affects the daily lives of Ghanaians.

Ghana therefore needs sustainable ways of building its foreign-exchange reserves. This is where gold becomes strategically important.

Central banks across the world are rethinking their reserve portfolios as geopolitical fragmentation raises concerns about the accessibility of foreign-held assets, while dollar-funding pressures continue to influence global financial stability.

Ghana, therefore, needs to follow the example of other countries by diversifying its reserve base and reducing excessive dependence on foreign currencies to mitigate volatility linked to instability in the foreign-exchange market.

Turning Ghana’s gold into economic strength

The Domestic Gold Purchase Programme sought to purchase gold produced domestically, export it and convert the proceeds into foreign exchange that becomes part of Ghana’s reserves.

The programme generated US$13.8 billion in reserves, accumulated from domestic production rather than external borrowing. That distinction matters.

Borrowing dollars gives a country foreign exchange today but creates a repayment obligation tomorrow. Gold production, when properly captured within the formal economy, can provide a domestic source of foreign exchange.

In simple terms, Ghana is attempting to use what it produces at home to strengthen its reserves rather than continually relying on external borrowing.

So, what is the GH¢21.89 billion?

This is perhaps the most misunderstood part of the debate.

The GH¢21.89 billion is primarily an accounting adjustment, not a GH¢21.89 billion cash outflow. An accounting adjustment occurs when an asset is recognised in financial statements using a particular valuation and differences arise because of changes or differences in applicable exchange rates.

In this case, gold was purchased from miners in cedis at prevailing market prices but recorded in the Bank’s books at the official Bank of Ghana exchange rate in accordance with International Accounting Standard (IAS) 21.

Pricing close to the bureau rate is also consistent with Section 3(h) of the Ghana Gold Board Act, 2025 (Act 1140), which requires measures to discourage illegal gold trading.

Gold is acquired at the prevailing market rate because pricing below that level does not effectively reduce the cost to the State. It risks displacing the gold out of the formal economy.

The difference between those rates created an exchange-rate adjustment.

The key point is simple: an accounting loss is not necessarily the same as a cash loss.

The gold was acquired, exported and sold to offtakers, with the resulting foreign exchange becoming part of Ghana’s reserves.

Indeed, after accounting for the government’s GH¢5 billion cost share and GH¢7.9 billion in realised gains on gold bullion sales, the net cost recognised in the Bank’s accounts was GH¢9.05 billion.

Therefore, GH¢21.89 billion represents the gross programme cost, while GH¢9.05 billion represents the Bank’s net share carried in its profit-and-loss account.

Why was the figure so large in 2025?

The framework remained the same from the inception of the DGPP. However, in 2025, two factors operated in the same direction.

First, the cedi appreciated by approximately 40.7% during the year. Appreciation widens the divergence between the market acquisition rate and the official recording rate because the market takes time to adjust. The stronger the cedi, the larger the resulting accounting adjustment in cedi terms.

Second, the programme approximately doubled in scale, from 56.47 tonnes in 2024 to 110.99 tonnes in 2025, with a value of US$11.4 billion.

A wider divergence applied to twice the volume naturally produces a substantially larger figure. Across 2024, the divergence averaged under 5%. Across 2025, it averaged approximately 12%, and considerably more during the second half of the year.

Why not simply buy the gold at the official exchange rate?

This is where economic reality becomes important.

Gold producers operate in a competitive market. If a formal buyer offers significantly below the prevailing market price, the seller has another option: sell to informal buyers or smugglers.

Ghana has experienced this before.

Following the introduction of a 3% withholding tax in 2021, official artisanal and small-scale gold exports fell from 39.3 tonnes to 3.4 tonnes, a 91% decline in one year.

The evidence suggests that production did not simply disappear; rather, gold declarations into the formal system collapsed.

The lesson is clear: if Ghana tries to buy its own gold too cheaply, Ghana may simply lose the gold to informal channels. That means losing the foreign exchange, taxes, traceability and reserve accumulation associated with formal transactions.

What did Ghana gain?

The gains are significant.

Formal artisanal and small-scale gold exports increased from 63.6 tonnes in 2024 to 103 tonnes in 2025.

An independent assessment by economists from the University of Ghana and the University of Ghana Business School suggests that the additional 39.4 tonnes was plausibly gold previously lost to smuggling and subsequently captured within the formal framework.

At 2025 prices, this represented approximately US$3.54 billion in gold redirected from illegal traders into Ghana’s reserves.

That is why the debate should not stop at the accounting adjustment.

We should also ask: How much foreign exchange did Ghana gain? How much gold was brought into the formal economy? How much smuggling was displaced? And how much reserve accumulation was achieved without external borrowing?

Those questions provide a fuller picture of the programme’s economic impact.

Why this matters for the cedi, inflation and interest rates

Stronger foreign-exchange reserves improve the Bank of Ghana’s ability to manage periods of pressure on the cedi.

A more stable cedi can reduce imported inflationary pressures. Lower inflation improves household purchasing power and gives businesses greater certainty in planning.

Lower inflation can also create room for interest rates to decline over time.

This matters enormously.

High interest rates make borrowing expensive, discourage business expansion and constrain investment. Lower interest rates, when supported by sustainable disinflation and macroeconomic stability, can make credit more accessible and create better conditions for businesses to invest, expand and create jobs.

Therefore, a stable exchange rate, lower inflation and declining interest rates are not isolated statistics. Together, they establish the foundation upon which sustainable economic growth can be built.

The Bank of Ghana’s responsibility is not simply to “keep the dollar rate down.” Its broader mandate is to help create the monetary and financial conditions necessary for stability, confidence and sustainable growth.

The weaknesses are being addressed

Acknowledging the gains achieved through the programme does not mean suggesting that it was perfect. It means recognising both its achievements and the reforms being undertaken to address its weaknesses.

Transaction charges reportedly fell from approximately 17% of transaction value before 2025 to 7.25% by February 2026, and subsequently to 5% effective August 1, 2026, with the latter borne by the Ministry of Finance and allocated in the budget.

The Bank also moved towards multiple approved offtakers, increasing competition and improving commercial terms.

The GoldBod service fee was reduced from 0.50% before 2025 to 0.40% in 2025 and subsequently to 0.10%.

More importantly, from July 1, 2026, GoldBod introduced a benchmark pricing framework using international LBMA AM and PM prices.

This is intended to reduce reliance on informal market quotations, improve transparency and ultimately narrow the exchange-rate gap that generated much of the accounting adjustment.

The way forward

Ghana should not respond to the GH¢21.89 billion figure by abandoning the programme. The answer is to make the programme better.

We must continue reducing transaction costs, strengthen transparent benchmark pricing, maintain competition among offtakers, improve disclosure around programme revenues and costs, and intensify the fight against gold smuggling.

Most importantly, Ghana must ensure that the foreign-exchange reserves generated through such programmes contribute to broader macroeconomic stability and, ultimately, improved living standards.

The GH¢21.89 billion debate should therefore become an opportunity for economic education, not merely political confrontation.

Ghanaians deserve accountability and transparency. But they also deserve the complete story.

Economic recovery is not built by one policy or one institution. It is built by fixing vulnerabilities one after another: strengthening reserves, stabilising the currency, reducing inflation, lowering the cost of credit, restoring confidence, encouraging investment, expanding production and creating jobs.

The Bank of Ghana should never be above scrutiny. But it should also not be judged through a single headline number stripped of its economic context.

The real question is whether Ghana is becoming more financially resilient, better able to generate its own foreign exchange, more stable in its currency, less vulnerable to external shocks and better positioned for sustainable growth.

That is the bigger story.

On that journey, the work of the Bank of Ghana matters. The task now is to consolidate the gains, correct the weaknesses and keep moving forward.

The Bank of Ghana deserves a fair hearing and commendation for a programme that generated well over US$13 billion in reserves. The full and honest disclosure by the Bank of Ghana regarding the DGPP also deserves commendation.

By Nelson Cudjoe Kuagbedzi
BSc, MPhil, MBA, GSE, CA, MCIT, ACIB, ACI, MIoD
Finance and Tax Analyst
Cknellynelson@gmail.com

Oftentimes, you hear people say we have so many laws. They suggest that this country is not short of laws, but rather the lack of implementation and enforcement. That suggestion equally greeted the passage of the new Road Traffic Regulations, 2026 (LI 2519). To those who took that position, there was no need to pass a new law. According to them, the previous law, Road Traffic Regulations, 2012 (LI 2180) had sufficient provisions that could deal with our road traffic issues, making it unnecessary to enact a new law. 

For my position, it is better to have laws waiting for changing times than to allow ourselves to be overwhelmed by trends before finding ways to resolve them.

The lack of a legal regime to regulate the commercial use of motorbikes, popularly known as Okada, has brought a rather chaotic use of Okada on our streets. Today, in almost every corner of the country, motorbikes are used for fare-paying services.

For many years, the position of law enforcement has been that no law allows for the commercial use of motorbikes, especially for fare-paying passengers. As a result, we turned a blind eye to the phenomenon even though it was glaring. Commercial motor riders ride through all principal areas of the country. They pass in front of law enforcement officers who turn a blind eye. For those who attempt to check their operations, it has been one means of extortion or the other.

The commercial operation of motorbikes, until the passage of LI 2519, had no clear regulatory provisions in law. Indeed, it was prohibited under our laws and, for that matter, no clear efforts could be made to put the operators to the test.

In 2025, the Road Traffic Act, 2004 (Act 683), was amended to make room for the recognition of the use of motorcycles for commercial purposes. This mother Act provided a broader framework that allows for the regularization of Okada business in Ghana. 

In order to give effect to the general provision in the Act, LI 2519 was passed with specific provisions bearing on qualification, registration and operation of Okada. The entire provisions from Regulations 164 to Regulations 177 are dedicated to the commercial operation of motorcycles, tricycles and quadricycles and their associated offences. 

Let me attempt to look at some key provisions in LI 2519 in this regard.

Regulation 164 prohibits the use of a motorcycle, a tricycle, or a quadricycle for commercial purposes without holding a valid commercial rider’s licence issued by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA). 

Regulation 165 provides for the conditions for the grant of a commercial rider’s licence. The provision requires an applicant for a commercial rider’s licence to be at least 21 years of age, have a valid National Identification Card, prove to be a member of a commercial road transport organization associated with motorcycles, tricycles and quadricycles, and must have passed a medical examination determined by DVLA, a theory and practical test, and an in-traffic test and any other such tests determined by DVLA. 

Regulation 166 makes provisions for renewal of a rider’s licence. A rider’s licence, like a driver’s licence, is expected to be renewed every two years. 

Regulation 167 empowers DVLA to suspend or revoke a commercial rider’s licence where the licence holder is convicted of reckless or dangerous riding, use of a motorcycle, tricycle or quadricycle for an unlawful activity, or fails to renew the licence every two years. 

Regulation 168 deals specifically with the registration of motorcycles, tricycles or quadricycles. It provides that no person shall operate a commercial motorcycle, tricycle or quadricycle without registration with DVLA. Upon application to register a commercial motorcycle, tricycle or quadricycle, the applicant must prove ownership, and evidence that it has met the standards for roadworthiness set by DVLA, and paid the prescribed registration fee.

Regulation 169 and 170 provide for matters related to road certification and issuance of the same for commercial motorcycles, tricycles and quadricycles. 

Regulation 171 provides for safety measures expected of operators of commercial motorcycle, tricycle, and quadricycle. Key among the provisions is to stick within the maximum number of passengers determined by DVLA. 

As noted earlier, LI 2519 requires commercial riders to be members of unions or organizations associated with motorcycles, tricycles, and quadricycles. As a result, Regulation 172 spells out the responsibilities of such unions or organizations. In addition, Regulation 173 also spells out the responsibilities of an owner of a commercial motorcycle, tricycle, or quadricycle. It ensures that the owner’s responsibilities do not end by simply buying any of the equipment and going to sleep.

Specific responsibilities have been provided for riders of commercial motorcycles under Regulation 174 of LI 2519. Key among them is that a rider or a commercial motorcycle shall not ride without a valid licence issued by DVLA; ride without wearing a crash helmet; give a pillion rider (passenger) a ride without making available protective crash helmet; give a child below the age of six a ride, unless the child is seated between the rider and an adult pillion rider, and the child and the adult pillion rider both wearing crash helmet among others. Subregulation (3) of Regulation 174 prohibits a motorcycle from running a red light at a signalled intersection. 

Responsibilities have also been specifically placed on riders of commercial tricycles or quadricycles. These include the need to ensure the display of rear number plates in a visible manner, no parking at undesignated areas, directions on overtaking, as well as prohibition from running red light at traffic signal points. 

A pillion rider (passenger) on a commercial motorcycle has necessarily been given specific responsibilities to conform to while on a commercial ride. The pillion rider is expected to accept to ride as a commercial rider only after wearing a protective crash helmet, among other responsibilities. 

Regulation 177 spells out the related offences to commercial motorcycles, tricycles and quadricycles. 

Having looked at the provisions of the new LI 2519, there is a need to look at the responsibilities of the DVLA in giving effect to the commercial operation of motorcycles, tricycles and quadricycles, which I shall refer to going forward as motorcycle(s). 

The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA) is expected to make distinctions in the current Licence Category A that allows for the riding of motorcycles. There must necessarily be a licence for private motorcycle riders and another for commercial motorcycle riders to make easy for road traffic enforcement.

In addition, the Authority is also expected to provide different licence plates for differentiating between commercial motorcycles and private motorcycles. This will also help in traffic enforcement as it will become easy to separate commercial motorcycles from private ones. 

In order to give meaning to these efforts aimed at regulating the commercial use of motorcycles on our roads, we must first arrest the chaos on the streets. This chaos includes riding for commercial purposes without holding the requisite licence, riding without proper training, riding without helmets, riding without reflective clothes for good visibility, riding without side mirrors, among others.

Going forward, every applicant for a rider’s licence must go through training and examination and only upon passing the required exams is one issued with a commercial rider’s licence. The existing riders who hold licences should be required to remain riders of private motorcycles until proven competent to operate commercially by passing the required examinations. 

At the point of registering a motorcycle for commercial purposes, the motorcycle must have two functioning side mirrors, two crash helmets, at least one reflective item of attire, and must have passed other roadworthy requirements including good tires, functional indicator lights, good shock absorbers, among others. It is only upon passing these basic safety requirements, in addition to other associated regulations spelt out in LI 2519, that one gets a motorcycle registered for commercial operations.  

Stephen Attuh

Director, Corporate Affairs, DVLA

You simply knew: I am still me.

Yet beneath that seemingly simple belief lies one of the deepest questions about human existence: what exactly makes us the same person over time?

Almost everything about us changes. Our bodies change. Our beliefs evolve. Relationships shift. Ambitions change. Memories fade and are reconstructed. Even our personalities can soften, harden or mature through experience.

The person you were at 10 is dramatically different from the person you are today. Yet you still say, “That was me.”

Why?

Identity Is Not About Remaining Unchanged

We often imagine identity as if there must be a permanent part of us that remains untouched while everything else changes.

But perhaps persistence does not require permanence.

A river remains the same river even though its water is constantly changing. A company remains the same company despite changes in its employees, offices, products and leadership. A nation can survive across generations even though none of its original citizens remain alive.

What survives is not necessarily the material itself, but the continuity of the system.

The same may be true of human beings.

You remain yourself not because every part of you has stayed unchanged, but because each version of you remains sufficiently connected to the one that came before it.

Identity, therefore, may be less like an object and more like a chain.

Each link changes, but each inherits something from the previous one.

The Self as a Chain of Inheritance

Consider yesterday’s version of you.

Yesterday, you accumulated experiences, made decisions, formed intentions, created obligations, strengthened some relationships, weakened others, learned lessons and made mistakes.

Then yesterday ended.

Today’s version of you emerged, but it did not begin from zero.

You inherited yesterday’s knowledge, relationships, reputation, commitments, mistakes, opportunities, debts and memories.

In other words, the present self inherits the state of the previous self.

Tomorrow’s self will, in turn, inherit the consequences of what today’s self does.

This creates a simple but powerful structure:

Past You → Present You → Future You

Each version exists only briefly, yet something is transferred between them.

That transfer is continuity.

Identity May Be Continuity, Not Permanence

This suggests another way of understanding personal identity.

A person persists through time not because their state remains unchanged, but because successive versions remain sufficiently connected to inherit memories, consequences, relationships and accumulated experiences.

Identity may therefore exist not entirely within a single moment, but between moments.

The connection matters as much as the state itself.

Perhaps the self is not a thing that simply persists through time. Perhaps the self is the continuity process itself.

The child becomes the teenager. The teenager becomes the adult. The adult becomes the elder.

No single version is identical to another.

Yet the chain remains.

And because that chain remains, we experience a continuous life.

Memory Matters, But It Is Not Everything

Memory appears central to this continuity. If you remember yesterday, the connection between yesterday’s self and today’s self feels obvious.

But memory cannot provide the entire explanation.

We forget enormous portions of our lives. Most people cannot remember ordinary days from 20 years ago. Yet they do not conclude that the person who lived through those days was somebody else.

Even when memory disappears, consequences can remain.

Skills remain. Habits remain. Relationships remain. Reputation remains. Experience can influence judgment even after the specific event that produced the lesson has been forgotten.

This means continuity operates at a deeper level than conscious recollection.

We carry far more of our past than we can remember.

Judgment Is Compressed Experience

One of the most valuable things transferred across time is judgment.

A person who has lived for decades has encountered thousands of situations. Most of those experiences cannot be recalled individually, but their lessons can become compressed into intuition.

You begin to recognise patterns.

You sense danger earlier. You understand people better. You learn which battles are worth fighting. You discover when patience is strength and when it becomes avoidance.

You learn to distinguish opportunity from distraction.

This is accumulated experience converted into judgment.

And judgment is one of the great products of personal continuity.

A life becomes more intelligent when yesterday’s experiences improve today’s decisions.

But this process is not automatic.

Experience can occur without learning. Learning can occur without preservation. Knowledge can be preserved without retrieval, and information can be retrieved without being applied.

For experience to compound into wisdom, continuity must work.

The Real Enemy Is Fragmentation

Perhaps one of the greatest obstacles to growth is not ignorance but fragmentation.

We repeatedly learn lessons and then forget them. We recognise patterns and later fail to retrieve them. We make promises to ourselves that future versions of us abandon.

We develop disciplines and allow them to disappear.

We accumulate wisdom but fail to transfer it deliberately.

The result is that a person can live for 70 years while repeatedly starting over.

Chronological age continues to increase, but judgment does not necessarily compound at the same rate.

Years accumulate automatically. Wisdom does not.

Wisdom requires preservation.

You Are Responsible for Your Future Self

Once we understand the self as a continuity chain, another important idea emerges.

We often think about our responsibilities toward other people — our children, families, employees, communities and future generations.

But there is another person toward whom we have responsibilities:

our future self.

Tomorrow’s you cannot participate in today’s decisions, yet tomorrow’s you must live with them.

Your future self will inherit the health you preserve or neglect, the relationships you nurture or damage, the money you save or spend, the reputation you build or destroy, and the knowledge and habits you choose to develop.

You will also hand forward the problems you solve — and those you choose to postpone.

In this sense, every present self is both an inheritor and a steward.

You inherited a life from your past self. You are modifying it now. Eventually, you will hand it to your future self.

This creates an important ethical principle:

Treat your future self as someone whose life has been entrusted to your stewardship.

The Self Is an Intergenerational Project

We usually reserve the word “inheritance” for transfers between generations.

But inheritance happens every day.

The person who wakes tomorrow inherits the world created by the person who goes to sleep tonight.

Seen this way, a human life resembles an intergenerational civilisation compressed into one biological lifetime.

Many versions of you appear. Each governs briefly. Each inherits accumulated assets and liabilities. Each makes decisions. Each modifies the system and hands it forward.

The quality of a life depends partly on whether these successive selves cooperate.

A disciplined life may be one in which present selves repeatedly sacrifice something so future selves inherit better conditions.

An undisciplined life may be one in which present selves repeatedly consume resources while sending the costs forward.

Suddenly, saving, exercise, education, reputation, patience and self-control reveal a common structure.

They are all forms of continuity investment.

They transfer value through time.

Death Gives Continuity Its Final Test

Eventually, however, the biological chain ends. There is no next version of the physical self.

Does continuity therefore end?

Not necessarily.

By then, parts of the self may already have migrated beyond the individual — into children, institutions, businesses, ideas, relationships, stories, values and written words.

A teacher continues through students.

A parent continues through children.

A founder continues through institutions.

A thinker continues through ideas.

A leader continues through culture.

Biological continuity may end, but causal continuity can continue for generations.

The human desire for legacy may arise from an intuitive recognition of this reality. We know our individual existence is temporary, so we attempt to transfer something beyond ourselves.

The Purpose of a Life May Be Transfer

This changes how we might define a successful life.

Instead of asking only:

What did I achieve?

we might also ask:

What became more capable of continuing because I existed?

Did my children inherit better judgment?

Did my organisation inherit stronger institutions?

Did my community inherit greater capacity?

Did the people around me inherit useful knowledge?

Did my ideas survive me?

Did I leave systems capable of learning from what I learned?

Did the future receive more than the past gave me?

These are continuity questions.

Perhaps they also reveal something profound about human purpose.

We enter life as inheritors.

For a brief period, we become custodians.

Eventually, we become ancestors.

That transition is unavoidable.

The real question is the quality of what we transfer.

You Are a Bridge

So, what makes you the same person you were yesterday?

Perhaps there is no single substance that must remain untouched.

Perhaps identity emerges from sufficient connection across change.

Memory connects you.

Relationships connect you.

Consequences connect you.

Commitments connect you.

Your body connects you.

Your story connects you.

And the accumulated state of your life connects one version of you to another.

You are therefore both remarkably stable and permanently unfinished.

You are an inheritance from someone who no longer exists exactly as they once did — your past self.

At the same time, you are constructing an inheritance for someone who does not yet exist exactly as they eventually will — your future self.

That makes the present moment more than simply “now”.

It is the transfer point between two worlds.

To live is to inherit a self from the past, modify it through present experience, and steward it toward a future self.

Perhaps that is why continuity matters so deeply.

Because beneath memory, identity, responsibility, wisdom and legacy lies the same fundamental architecture:

Something valuable survives change by being successfully transferred through time.

And perhaps the deepest expression of continuity is not found in companies, civilisations or technology.

It is happening quietly within us every day.

We are not merely beings who exist through time.

We are bridges through which the past becomes the future.

The rivers I was appointed to protect are in a worse state today than when I took office. I begin there because no account of that work is worth reading if it begins anywhere else.

Richard Dablah’s essay deserves a serious answer, and I want to give it one. He is right that the young man in the pit is not the beginning of galamsey but its most expendable participant.

He is right that before gold reaches his hands, someone has financed the operation, supplied the machinery, facilitated access to land, arranged the processing, moved the money and, often enough, provided the protection.

He is right that this makes galamsey a network rather than an activity, and that networks are not dismantled by repeatedly arresting their lowest-ranking members.

He is right, above all, about the accounting. Illegal mining transfers value from the future to the present.

The miner takes today’s income, the financier today’s return, and the trader today’s margin, and society inherits tomorrow’s bill in contaminated water, ruined farmland, and lost forest and public health costs that no one has ever priced.

I would add only that the bill is no longer in the future. Ghana had about 8.8 million hectares of primary forest at the turn of the last century, 4.2 million by 1950, and roughly 1.5 million by 1999. We are paying now.

Where I must part company with the essay is on one factual premise that runs beneath the whole argument: that Ghana has never attempted the intelligent version of this fight, and that what is needed is an “ecological intelligence system” satellite imagery, drones, geospatial linkage of licences to forests and rivers, equipment registration, financial intelligence, gold traceability, that the country has yet to imagine.

Ghana imagined it. Ghana built most of it. That it is unknown to a careful writer on the subject is not his failure but the state’s, and I will come to that.

What was built

Between 2017 and 2019 the committee I chaired put in place, with the stakeholder agencies, very nearly the architecture Mr Dablah describes.

Every artisanal and small-scale mining concession in the country was surveyed and mapped using global navigation satellite systems and drone technology so that for the first time the state held a verified baseline of where each licence physically sat on the ground.

Of some five thousand entities written to, one thousand three hundred and fifty appeared, were vetted against their licences, permits, tax identification, and company registration, and were regularised.

They were issued digital identity cards carrying Ghana Post GPS codes and licence validity, and signposts were erected at their concessions declaring ownership and boundaries.

The names were published in the newspapers and on radio. Four thousand miners were trained in sustainable mining and mineral processing at the University of Mines and Technology at Tarkwa, at the state’s expense.

Underneath all of this sat GalamSTOP. It was not, as is still sometimes reported, a task force. It was a software platform: a web application with full geographic information system capability, an Android application with custom GPS for field officers, a reporting dashboard, a data management system, and an online application and payment system.

It managed the entire lifecycle of a mining right from application through licensing and renewal to expiry. Its compliance module tracked payments made and outstanding, royalties, production reports, and contract terms.

It was designed from the outset to integrate the Environmental Protection Agency, the Water Resources Commission, the Forestry Commission, the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority, the Minerals Commission, and the district assemblies onto a single view so that the state could ask, in something close to real time, exactly the questions Mr. Dablah poses: where is the excavation, who holds the licence, whose machine is that, and is this inside a protected area?

We used satellite imagery as a matter of routine. The progressive destruction of the Apaprama and Kobro forest reserves and the diversion of the River Offin were documented in a time series of images running from December 2017 to the middle of 2020.

On the rivers, we stopped burning the engines of dredging platforms; the miners bought new engines within a day, and instead partnered with a trained diving and salvage outfit to tow the entire rigs away to depots far from the water. The miners lost everything. That worked.

What happened to it

The Forestry Commission refused to migrate onto the platform. The Minerals Commission approached it half-heartedly. That is the sentence I would ask readers to sit with, because it explains more about galamsey than any description of a pit.

There is a second sentence of the same kind. On 28 February 2019 Cabinet, having received an update on the committee’s work, directed the Minister for Lands and Natural Resources to suspend the issuance of all new prospecting licences by the Forestry and Minerals Commissions, and to suspend the licences already issued for operations in forty-seven forest reserves, pending environmental impact assessment. The directive was conveyed in writing on 4 March 2019.

It was not carried out. The destruction continued.

A monitoring platform is an instrument of visibility, and an agency that does not wish to be seen will decline to be instrumented.

A written directive from the Cabinet is an instrument of authority, and authority that is not enforced upon those who ignore it is advice.

This is what I would offer Mr Dablah’s argument as its missing variable. Every technology on his list is real, available and useful. None of them fails at the point of capability.

They fail at the point of institutional adoption, at the moment when an agency, a ministry or a well-connected licence holder must consent to be observed, measured and, if necessary, acted against. A design that does not solve for adoption is not a system. It is a wish.

Where he is ahead of us

I do not want to answer a good essay only by claiming precedence, because on three matters he is ahead of what we built, and I should say so plainly.

First, monetisation. Our architecture was strong at the site and nearly silent on how illegal gold becomes legitimate money.

Traceability from mine of origin, due diligence on aggregators and refiners, controls at the point of export, and financial investigation that follows wealth upward rather than stopping at the man in the pit, none of that was built, and much of it lay outside the mandate of the Ministry I held.

He is right that making illegally produced gold difficult to monetise is a more strategic objective than making illegal mining physically difficult.

Second, ecological accounting. We calculate gold production, export earnings and foreign exchange to the last decimal. We have no national account that carries a destroyed watershed as a liability.

Until environmental depletion appears on the national balance sheet as a real economic cost, extraction will go on masquerading as wealth creation. That is his phrase and it is exactly right.

Third, benefit-sharing. We ran alternative livelihood programmes and I still believe in them, but vocational training is not the same thing as a genuine stake in the mineral wealth beneath a community’s own land.

He is right that the supply of recruits is an economic fact before it is a criminal one and that no amount of policing removes an economic fact.

Why this matters now

These are not academic points in 2026. The Ghana Gold Board is currently tendering for a blockchain-based track-and-trace system, intended for deployment by the end of this year, to tie every gram of gold it buys to a verified mine of origin.

L.I. 2462, which permitted mining in forest reserves, has been revoked. Restrictions on excavator importation and the tracking of excavators have been reintroduced the same measures directed in the third quarter of 2018, which were never enforced.

And the Forestry Commission has itself now published a satellite-based assessment finding that 8,923.8 hectares across forty-five forest reserves and a national park had been damaged as at the end of 2024, using precisely the method it declined to adopt when it was offered to it.

I welcome every one of these developments without qualification, and I have no interest in whose administration introduced them. But I have watched this film before, and I know how it ends when the last reel is missing.

A traceability system is only as good as the institutions willing to be bound by it. If licensed operators can wash tainted gold through their own permits for a fee, the register will simply record laundered provenance with greater precision than before. The instrument will be excellent. The outcome will be identical.

A word about the record

Mr Dablah could not have known most of what I have set out here, and that is not his fault. GalamSTOP was never publicly documented in any accessible form. No public account of the committee’s methods was ever published by the state.

What the country knows of that work it knows because a report I wrote in March 2021 for internal purposes found its way into the newspapers two years later, and was then read as a catalogue of accusations rather than as a record of an architecture.

A state that does not publish its own institutional memory should not be surprised when its citizens propose, in good faith, that it build what it has already built and abandoned. If nothing else comes of this exchange, I would like that to change.

The question, restated

Mr Dablah ends by asking how Ghana redesigns a national system in which destroying a river can be profitable, politically survivable, and economically rational. It is the right question, and I would restate it only slightly, in the light of four years spent inside the attempt.

The technology is not the constraint. The law is largely not the constraint. The constraint is whether the institutions charged with enforcement can be made independent enough, and durable enough to act against the people they will inevitably be required to act against including those who appointed them. Everything else follows from that, and nothing works without it.

The river, as he writes, has no political constituency. It cannot finance a campaign, threaten an election, or hire lawyers.

Institutions exist precisely to be the constituency of the things that cannot speak for themselves. That is the whole of their justification. Ours were captured by the things that can.

One such person is Ghanaian businessman and philanthropist Alhaji Seidu Agongo, whose philanthropic activities have, over the years, reflected his belief in supporting people in difficult moments and promoting unity.

His recent gestures of support have once again highlighted his commitment to helping individuals, families and institutions.

Supporting a bereaved family

In one of his recent acts of compassion, Alhaji Agongo donated GH¢50,000 to the wife and children of the late Sanni Jaja, a former Deputy Ambassador to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

The donation was intended to support the bereaved family following their loss and offer them some financial relief during a difficult period.

Beyond the financial assistance, the gesture serves as a reminder to the family that they have people willing to stand by them even after the funeral and in the difficult days that follow.

For many families, the period after the loss of a loved one can be particularly challenging, especially when the deceased was a major source of support. Such interventions can therefore provide meaningful assistance as families begin to adjust to life without their loved one.

Supporting prayers for the President and the nation

In another gesture, Alhaji Agongo donated GH¢5,000 to the National Chief Imam to support special prayers for President John Dramani Mahama, seeking divine wisdom, guidance and strength for the President and prayers for Mallams across the country.

The gesture reflects his belief that national development requires not only economic policies, infrastructure and investment but also wisdom, responsible leadership and spiritual guidance.

By supporting prayers for the President, Alhaji Agongo is also emphasising the importance of seeking the wellbeing of the nation and its leadership beyond political and partisan considerations.

Philanthropy as a responsibility

Alhaji Agongo’s supporters describe his philanthropy as more than simply giving money. They see it as an expression of his belief that individuals and institutions have a responsibility to support one another, particularly during difficult times.

His approach also speaks to the broader role philanthropy can play in society by providing assistance where individuals or families may be vulnerable and strengthening the bonds that hold communities together.

In a society where economic inequality and social challenges continue to affect many people, acts of generosity can provide immediate relief while also inspiring others to contribute to the wellbeing of their communities.

For Alhaji Agongo, therefore, philanthropy appears to be rooted in a simple principle: that humanity thrives when people look beyond themselves and extend a helping hand to others.

His recent gestures to the bereaved family and support for prayers for the country’s leadership provide further examples of that philosophy.

At its core, the message is one of compassion, unity and shared responsibility — values that remain essential to building a more caring and cohesive Ghana.

Ghana will still suffer even if we beg Jesus Christ to be President – Market queen mother

The figures have understandably triggered considerable public debate. However, the conversation should go beyond the headline loss.

The more important question is: What exactly accounted for the $1.7 billion, and what can Ghana do to reduce such losses, if possible?

Gold trading involves several components and associated costs. A proper assessment must therefore examine each component to establish what contributed to the reported losses.

Rather than treating the $1.7 billion figure in isolation, policymakers, economists and stakeholders in the gold industry should break down the numbers and determine whether the losses arose from pricing differences, financing costs, operational expenses, foreign exchange movements, transaction costs or other factors associated with the gold trading programme.

This level of analysis is particularly important because Ghana’s gold sector remains one of the country’s most significant sources of foreign exchange.

The objective should not simply be to establish whether there was a loss. It should be to understand why the loss occurred, whether any portion of it was unavoidable, and what measures can be introduced to prevent a recurrence or significantly reduce the cost.

A transparent and detailed analysis would also help the public distinguish between genuine financial losses and costs that may have been incurred in pursuit of a broader policy objective.

For instance, if part of the reported loss resulted from financing arrangements or a deliberate policy intervention in the gold market, that should be clearly explained. Equally, if there were inefficiencies, poor pricing decisions or avoidable transaction costs, those issues must be identified and addressed.

Ghana cannot afford to have a debate about billions of cedis or dollars without understanding the underlying numbers.

Ultimately, the conversation should move beyond “Ghana lost $1.7 billion” to a more constructive question:

What made up the $1.7 billion, and how can Ghana improve the economics of its gold trade?

That, in my view, is the debate worth having.

The Funeral Is Not the Problem, Our Priorities Might Be

There are few occasions in African communal life as emotionally powerful as a funeral. When death visits, families gather from considerable distances, friends contribute without being asked, and communities organise with a discipline that would impress any project manager. Food is prepared, chairs appear in their hundreds, and grief is transformed into collective remembrance. African funerals rightly remind us that no human being should disappear as though they never mattered.

The argument here is not against funerals. It is against an uncomfortable contradiction, captured in a NyansaKasa (words of wisdom) reflection: in many African homes, there is always money for funerals but too little for fruit and vegetables. The line is deliberately provocative, since healthy food can genuinely be unaffordable or inaccessible, and the World Health Organisation estimates that around three billion people globally cannot access safe, nutritious and sufficient food. But beneath the exaggeration sits a serious question. Why are human beings sometimes better at mobilising resources after preventable illness and death than before them? As NyansaKasa (words of wisdom) puts it, there is dignity in honouring the dead, but perhaps even greater wisdom in investing early enough to postpone the funeral. That is not disrespect. It is simply love translated into prevention.

The Statistics Are Already Knocking

Africa is undergoing a profound health transition. In the year two thousand, noncommunicable diseases such as cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes and chronic respiratory illness accounted for roughly a quarter of deaths across the World Health Organisation’s African Region. By 2019, that figure had climbed to thirty-seven per cent. In Ghana, the warning is more immediate still, with the World Health Organisation reporting in 2025 that noncommunicable diseases are now responsible for nearly half of all deaths in the country. These are not abstract numbers. They are fathers, mothers, teachers, traders and executives, increasingly dying earlier than they should. Globally, noncommunicable diseases now account for nearly three quarters of all deaths, with low- and middle-income countries bearing a disproportionate share of that burden.

Diet is only one part of this picture, alongside genetics, tobacco, alcohol, air pollution and inactivity, yet it remains a significant and modifiable risk factor. The World Health Organisation recommends that adults and children over ten consume at least four hundred grams of fruit and vegetables daily, and has estimated that inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption was associated with roughly three point nine million deaths worldwide in 2017. Suddenly, the fruit bowl looks considerably less decorative than we once assumed.

We Have Become Experts at Responding After the Fact

Perhaps our deeper challenge is that we are often more responsive than preventive. Someone becomes seriously ill, and money is mobilised within hours. A hospital bill arrives, and family WhatsApp groups awaken with impressive efficiency, reuniting relatives who have not spoken since the last family disagreement. Then, tragically, if treatment fails, another round of mobilisation begins, this time for the funeral. There is a certain gentle humour in our capacity to assemble ourselves magnificently only once circumstances have become irreversible, and the family meeting that could never agree on funding an annual medical screening can become astonishingly united when choosing funeral cloth. One may smile at that. One should then become rather quiet.

As NyansaKasa (words of wisdom) reminds us, we should not become so organised around mourning that we remain disorganised around prevention. This pattern is not uniquely African. Human beings everywhere discount distant risks and react more strongly to immediate events, and prevention is psychologically difficult precisely because its greatest success is something that never happens. Nobody throws a party because hypertension was detected early, and no newspaper announces that a daily walk quietly added years to somebody’s life. Prevention, in this sense, suffers from its own success. It is invisible.

Poverty Cannot Be Lectured Away

It would be profoundly unfair, however, to tell a low-income household to buy more vegetables while ignoring the economics surrounding food. Healthy eating is not merely a matter of personal discipline, and the World Health Organisation recognises that nutritious diets can be inaccessible, particularly in food-insecure communities. Rapid urbanisation, alongside the aggressive marketing of highly processed foods, has shifted diets towards products heavy in salt, sugar and unhealthy fats. The mother choosing inexpensive, calorie-dense food to feed several children is therefore not necessarily uninformed. She may instead be making a rational economic decision within a system that has made the unhealthy plate cheaper than the healthy one.

This changes the policy conversation considerably. If African governments want healthier citizens, they must help build healthier food systems, since agriculture cannot be separated from healthcare, and school feeding cannot be separated from long-term public health. What we grow, process, transport, advertise and sell forms one enormous health supply chain. As NyansaKasa (words of wisdom) cautions, we should not lecture the household about the healthy plate while designing an economy that makes the unhealthy plate cheaper. Individual responsibility must meet institutional responsibility somewhere in the middle, and at present, it rarely does.

A Continent That Grows Food Should Not Struggle to Eat Well

Here lies another contradiction. Africa possesses considerable agricultural potential, from Ghana’s pineapples, tomatoes and leafy vegetables to the substantial agricultural capability found across Côte d’Ivoire, Kenya, Ethiopia and South Africa. Yet post-harvest losses, inadequate cold chains and fragmented logistics routinely make nutritious food unnecessarily expensive or altogether unavailable. This is not merely an agricultural failure. It is a public health failure wearing an agricultural disguise.

Imagine treating investment in cold storage as preventive healthcare, or municipalities deliberately protecting fresh food markets the way they protect hospitals. Imagine schools teaching children to grow vegetables alongside mathematics, and agricultural policy measuring not only tonnes produced but whether citizens can actually afford a nutritious diet. Japan has long embedded diet and health awareness into everyday culture, and Nordic countries use school meals as public health policy. Africa need not copy either, but we might usefully borrow the underlying principle that health is produced long before anybody enters a hospital.

The Home Is the First Ministry of Health

Government cannot do everything, and the most consequential public health institution may in fact be the household. Children learn at home what to eat, whether water or sugary drinks are normal, and whether physical activity is naturally part of life. The World Health Organisation notes that dietary behaviours established during childhood frequently continue into adulthood, which should change how parents view the family table. A child who grows up seeing fruit as ordinary rather than occasional is receiving preventive healthcare without ever knowing it.

As NyansaKasa (words of wisdom) observes, the home is the first hospital, the kitchen its first pharmacy, and daily habits often write prescriptions years before any doctor does. This is not a claim that food replaces medicine, for it plainly does not. Instead, it is a reminder that lifestyle is itself a part of health, quietly accumulating for decades before any diagnosis names it.

What If We Invested in Life as Generously as We Invest in Farewell

Picture a modest cultural shift, not towards smaller love for the dead, but towards greater investment in the living. Family associations that already mobilise magnificently during funerals could just as easily encourage annual health screening. Churches, mosques, traditional authorities and community organisations could make prevention part of their social responsibility, while employers strengthen workplace wellness and schools normalise nutrition literacy. Governments can use regulation, labelling and carefully designed fiscal measures to make the healthier choice the easier one, tools the World Health Organisation itself recommends. Agricultural policy should encourage diversified, nutritious local production, and health systems must expand early detection of hypertension, diabetes and related risks. Households with the means might reasonably consider preventive health expenditure as seriously as they already consider ceremony. The objective is not immortality, since every life ends. The objective is simply avoiding the deaths that arrive unnecessarily early.

What Is Wrong With Us?

Perhaps the answer lies partly in what we make visible. Funerals are public, while prevention is private. A magnificent funeral is seen by hundreds, while a plate of vegetables receives no applause whatsoever. A beautiful coffin is visible, while controlled blood pressure is not; a convoy attracts attention in a way that twenty years of quietly added healthier choices never could. We may simply have confused visibility with value. This is not an argument for abandoning tradition, for African societies should rightly preserve the solidarity and dignity that surround death. It is an invitation to transfer some of that same extraordinary solidarity towards life: checking on relatives before they become patients, and contributing to screening before contributing to hospital bills. Consider celebrating a seventy-fifth birthday with even greater enthusiasm than the funeral that might otherwise have arrived at fifty-five. That would be cultural progress without any cultural abandonment.

As NyansaKasa (words of wisdom) reflects, tradition becomes stronger, not weaker, when wisdom allows it to protect tomorrow as beautifully as it honours yesterday. Healthcare does not begin when illness arrives. It begins with food systems, education, sanitation, screening and household choices made quietly, years in advance. Africa cannot hospitalise its way out of every preventable disease, and no family should have to mourn what earlier intervention might have delayed or prevented. So let us honour our dead, gather, remember, and comfort families as we always have. But while we are together, perhaps we might also ask whether the greatest tribute to those who have gone is helping those still here to live rather longer. The funeral will eventually come for every one of us. There is no need, out of habit or neglect, to send it an early invitation.

About the Author

Ing. Professor Douglas K. Boateng is a strategist in governance, industrialisation and supply chains, and serves as a professional chairperson, an international Chartered Director (UK) and a Chartered Engineer (UK). A Pan-Africanist and social entrepreneur at heart, he has spent his career working across public institutions, corporate boards and industrial policy, in Africa and beyond, guided by the conviction that strong institutions are built one honest decision at a time. His contributions to industry and academia have earned him more than six lifetime achievement awards throughout his career. He is the founder of NyansaKasa, Words of Wisdom, a collection of daily aphorisms he has written and shared since late 2019, distilling decades of experience advising governments, boards, and enterprises on governance, accountability, and institutional resilience into words meant to challenge and endure. He convenes the Boardroom Governance Summit, Africa’s largest boardroom-focused summit, and writes a widely read op-ed series titled “Inconvenient Truth” and “What Is Wrong With Us,” featured on some of the region’s leading digital media platforms. Professor Boateng can be reached via LinkedIn or at info@panavest.com.

The latest confrontation between the Minority Leader in Parliament, Alexander Kwamena Afenyo-Markin, and the Chief Executive Officer of the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod), Sammy Gyamfi, has reached precisely that moment.

This is no longer merely another episode in Ghana’s increasingly aggressive political discourse.

It has moved beyond arguments over the economy, GoldBod, the Bank of Ghana or the reported US$1.7 billion losses associated with the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme.

It has become a question of reputation, public trust and the dignity of high political office.

Sammy Gyamfi has described Afenyo Markin as an “extortionist” and has challenged him to sue if he believes the allegation is false.

He has gone further, suggesting that the Minority Leader’s failure to sue amounts to an inability to refute the accusation.

That challenge should not be ignored. Afenyo Markin must either take the matter to court and demand that Sammy Gyamfi prove the allegation, or seriously consider whether he can continue occupying the office of Minority Leader while allowing such a grave allegation to hang over his head.

This is not about political pride. It is about the office. The Minority Leader is not just another politician.

Alexander Afenyo Markin is currently the Minority Leader of Ghana’s Ninth Parliament and Member of Parliament for Effutu.

The Minority Leader is one of the most consequential parliamentary offices in the Republic.

He is the principal political voice of the opposition in Parliament.

He leads the parliamentary force whose constitutional and democratic responsibility includes scrutinizing government, challenging executive decisions and demanding accountability.

That office therefore carries a reputation larger than the individual who occupies it. When the person sitting in that chair is publicly labelled an “extortionist”, the appropriate response cannot simply be another press conference, another radio interview or another political insult.

There must be clarity. If the allegation is false, prove it false. If it is true, the Ghanaian public deserves to know the truth.

And if it cannot be established either way, then the proper place to settle the matter is not the microphone. It is the court. This is where Afenyo Markin must draw the line
Sammy Gyamfi has not merely criticized Afenyo Markin’s politics. Political criticism is normal.

A politician can be called incompetent, arrogant, ineffective, hypocritical or even politically misguided.

Those are harsh political judgments, and politicians must develop thick skins.

But “extortionist” carries a different weight. It suggests conduct involving the improper extraction of money or benefit through pressure or coercion.

That is a serious accusation against anyone.
It becomes even more serious when directed at the Minority Leader of the Parliament of Ghana.

Mr Gyamfi has publicly challenged Afenyo Markin to sue him and substantiate the allegation.

So what exactly is stopping the Minority Leader? If Afenyo Markin believes the allegation is defamatory and completely without foundation, he should instruct his lawyers to act.

Not tomorrow. Not after another round of political interviews. Act.
Let Sammy Gyamfi enter court and prove that Afenyo Markin is an extortionist.

Let the evidence speak.
Let the documents speak. Let the witnesses speak. Let the law speak.

That would be far more powerful than ten political rallies and a hundred angry interviews. Parliament deserves better than political mudslinging.

There is another dimension to this matter that should concern every Ghanaian.
The fight began around allegations concerning GoldBod and losses reportedly exceeding US$1.7 billion under the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme.

The IMF has indeed reported losses exceeding US$1.7 billion in connection with the programme.
However, that does not automatically establish that GoldBod alone caused the entire loss.

The institutional responsibilities and transaction structures require proper examination.
GoldBod, for its part, has pointed to its audited 2025 accounts and says the institution recorded an operational surplus of about GH¢907 million and an overall surplus of about GH¢5.4 billion.

The Information Services Department has also reported GoldBod’s position that the Auditor-General’s audit found no adverse findings against the institution.

These are legitimate issues for public debate. The Minority has every right to ask questions. GoldBod has every right to defend its record.

Its CEO has every right to challenge allegations against the institution.
But there is a line between robust accountability and personal accusation.

Once that line is crossed, the person accused must decide whether to allow the accusation to define him or to confront it decisively.

Afenyo Markin cannot demand accountability from government while avoiding accountability for himself. This is the uncomfortable part.
Afenyo Markin has built much of his political identity around holding government accountable.

He has repeatedly insisted that the Minority will scrutinise government policies and programmes and “hold the Government’s feet to the fire.”
That principle must apply to everyone, including himself.

The standard cannot be: “Government must answer difficult questions, but I don’t have to answer difficult allegations.” That would be politically convenient but morally inconsistent.
If the Minority Leader believes GoldBod has mishandled public resources, he must demand evidence and accountability.

If GoldBod’s CEO believes the Minority Leader is an extortionist, then he too must be prepared to provide evidence.

Nobody should be protected because of political affiliation. Nobody should be condemned because of political affiliation. That is how a democracy works.

Afenyo-Markin is not a private citizen engaging in an argument at a drinking spot. He is the Minority Leader of Parliament.

The GoldBod CEO is not merely a private commentator either. GoldBod describes itself as Ghana’s legally authourised body responsible for licensing and undertaking the purchase, assay, refining and export of gold and other precious minerals.

Both men therefore occupy positions that require discipline.

The country is watching.And Ghana does not need its most senior political actors turning public institutions into arenas for personal warfare.

The Minority Leader’s office was previously occupied by figures such as J.H. Mensah, Papa Owusu-Ankomah and Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu. Whether one agrees with their politics or not, the office carried considerable institutional weight.

That reputation must be protected.
Indeed, Sammy Gyamfi himself has invoked the reputations of former Minority Leaders while attacking Afenyo-Markin.

But that should make the present occupant even more determined to defend the integrity of the office.
So, Afenyo-Markin, take the challenge. This is where political calculations should end.

Afenyo Markin should not merely respond that he has been insulted. He should not spend another week trading accusations with the GoldBod CEO.

He should not allow the matter to disappear beneath the next political controversy.
He has two options.

Sue. Or, if he believes he cannot or will not take legal action to clear his name, then he should seriously consider whether remaining Minority Leader under the shadow of such an allegation is sustainable.

Because the Ghanaian public cannot have it both ways.
You cannot occupy one of the highest political offices in the country, accuse others of wrongdoing and demand accountability from public institutions while allowing a serious allegation against your own character to remain unresolved.

The Minority Leader must understand that the battle is no longer simply Afenyo-Markin versus Sammy Gyamfi.

It is about whether public office in Ghana still carries standards. And the NPP must also grow a spine.

The New Patriotic Party cannot simply defend its Minority Leader through press statements and social media posts.

If Afenyo Markin believes the allegation is false, the party should encourage him to clear his name through the appropriate legal process.

And if he refuses to sue, the NPP must ask a difficult question: Can someone credibly lead the parliamentary opposition while carrying an unresolved allegation of extortion against him?

The party should not turn this into another partisan shouting match. It should make the issue about institutional credibility.

If Afenyo Markin sues, the NPP should stand behind due process and allow the courts to determine the matter.

If he refuses to sue and cannot provide a convincing public explanation for his decision, then the NPP must have the courage to consider whether another person should lead its parliamentary caucus.

That would not be an admission of guilt. It would be an acknowledgement that the reputation of the office is bigger than the reputation of the individual. And Sammy Gyamfi must also understand the burden of his office.

This argument cannot be one-sided. The GoldBod CEO has every right to defend the institution he leads.

But occupying the CEO’s chair also comes with responsibilities. GoldBod itself presents its mission as transforming Ghana’s gold industry, strengthening national value retention and building a world-class trading organisation.
That requires credibility.

When the CEO of such a strategically important national institution makes a serious allegation against the Minority Leader, he should be prepared to defend that allegation with the same confidence with which he made it.

If he has evidence, produce it. If he has documents, let them be examined. If he has facts, let the court test them.

That is how mature democracies operate. Ghana needs less political theatre and more consequences.
For too long, Ghanaian politics has developed an unfortunate habit. Politicians make explosive allegations on television.

Public officials respond with insults. Supporters flood social media. The matter trends for three days. Then everyone moves on. The allegation remains. The reputation remains damaged. And nobody is held responsible.
We cannot continue like this.

If an allegation is serious enough to make publicly, it should be serious enough to defend legally. If an accusation is false, the victim should have the courage to challenge it.
If it is true, the person making it should have the courage to prove it. That is the standard Ghana deserves.

So, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, this is your moment. Do not defend the title of Minority Leader with speeches. Defend the integrity of the office with action.

Sue Sammy Gyamfi and make him prove that you are an extortionist. And if you will not, then perhaps the NPP must ask whether you should continue occupying the office.

Because at this level of public leadership, silence is not neutrality. Sometimes, silence becomes an unanswered question.

And the Minority Leader of Ghana’s Parliament should not allow an accusation of this magnitude to become his unanswered question.

Clear your name. Clear the office. Or clear the way.

The incident happened during the Graduate Management Accelerated Programme graduation ceremony organised by UBA, where a young lady addressed the businessman by his first name.

“Good morning, Tony,” she said.

Mr Elumelu, who appeared surprised by the address, initially responded, “Toyin? Toyin?”

After she clarified that she had said “Tony”, he quickly corrected her.

“Okay. No, you won’t call me Tony. You’ll call me Mr Elumelu or TOE. You won’t call me Tony, or Chairman. I don’t subscribe to that kind of Oyinbo life, okay?” he said.

The young woman immediately corrected herself.

“Good morning, Mr Elumelu,” she said before continuing with her question.

The short exchange has since gone viral, with social media users divided over whether the young woman was being disrespectful or simply following the more informal corporate culture that has become common in many workplaces.

But is calling an elder by their first name disrespectful?

For many Africans, especially those raised in traditional homes, the answer may seem obvious.

Growing up, many of us were taught that respect is not only shown through our actions but also through the way we address people.

If someone is older than you and you do not know their name, you are likely to hear, “Auntie” or “Uncle” before you even get to know them properly.

And when the person holds a position, the title often comes with the territory.

You say “Mr”, “Madam”, “Doctor”, “Professor”, “Chief”, “Chairman” or whatever title the person is known by.

It is simply how many of us were brought up.

So, when someone who is much older or holds a senior position tells you, “Don’t call me by my first name,” many Africans may not see it as a big deal.

You simply adjust and move on.

Then comes Gen Z and the ‘first-name basis’ culture

But things are changing.

In many modern workplaces, especially multinational companies and corporate organisations, employees are encouraged to communicate more casually.

The CEO can be “John”.

The manager can be “Ama”.

The boss can even tell you, “Please, just call me by my name.”

And that does not necessarily mean there is no respect.

It simply means that is the culture the organisation has adopted.

That may explain why some people believe the young woman may not necessarily have intended to disrespect Mr Elumelu.

She could simply have been operating within the increasingly common corporate culture where senior executives and younger employees interact on a first-name basis.

‘Not everyone subscribes to that Oyinbo life’

But Mr Elumelu’s response has also reminded many people that not everyone subscribes to that style of interaction.

For some people, titles are important.

And there is nothing wrong with that.

A person may have spent years building a career, earning a professional title or rising through an organisation, and may genuinely appreciate being addressed by that title.

Take academia, for example.

For some professors, being addressed as “Professor” is not just about showing off a title.

It represents years of study, research, sacrifice and hard work.

So forgetting or refusing to use the title may feel disrespectful to them.

The same applies to traditional leaders, religious leaders, senior professionals and others who place importance on how they are addressed.

But does first name automatically mean disrespect?

Not necessarily.

That is where the conversation gets interesting.

Calling someone by their first name can be disrespectful in one setting and completely normal in another.

It depends on the person, the relationship and, importantly, the culture of the environment.

In some workplaces, calling the CEO by his first name is completely acceptable.

In others, you may be expected to say “Mr CEO”, “Sir” or use the person’s professional title.

For instance, some employees may call their CEO by his first name every day, and the CEO may respond happily.

That does not mean the employees have no respect for him.

It simply means that is the relationship and workplace culture they have agreed to.

But take that same CEO to a formal traditional or corporate event, and the way you address him may need to change.

Know the room

Perhaps that is the biggest lesson from the Tony Elumelu moment.

Know the room.

Know the person.

Know the occasion.

And, most importantly, know how that person wants to be addressed.

If someone tells you, “Please don’t call me by my first name. Call me Mr Elumelu,” there is really no need to argue.

Just say, “Mr Elumelu,” and continue.

After all, respect is not about winning an argument over a name.

What social media users are saying

The incident has generated plenty of reactions online, with some users siding with Mr Elumelu and others defending the young woman.

One social media user argued that the issue was less about Mr Elumelu being a billionaire and more about understanding the setting.

The user said addressing someone formally at an event where they are acting in their official capacity is different from having a casual conversation with someone you know personally.

Another user argued that even in Western societies, where first-name interactions are common, people still understand when a formal title is appropriate.

But others came to the young woman’s defence, pointing out that modern corporate culture often encourages employees to address senior executives by their first names.

One user noted that many corporate organisations deliberately create an informal environment where titles are played down to make employees feel more comfortable around senior management.

And that is probably why this particular exchange has struck a nerve.

It is not simply about Tony versus Mr Elumelu.

It is about two different ideas of respect meeting in one room.

One side says: “Respect your elders and their titles.”

The other says: “Respect does not always have to come with a title.”

Both arguments have their place.

A clash of cultures?

Perhaps Mr Elumelu was right.

Perhaps the young lady was also simply following what she has been taught in the corporate world.

Maybe neither side was entirely wrong.

African culture has traditionally placed a strong emphasis on age, hierarchy and titles, while modern corporate culture is increasingly moving towards informality and first-name relationships.

And as Gen Z enters the workplace, these two worlds are bound to collide from time to time.

So, before you confidently walk into a formal event and say, “Good morning, Tony!”, perhaps take a second to read the room.

Because as Mr Elumelu has reminded us:

Not everybody subscribes to that Oyinbo life.

ALSO:

I don’t subscribe to Oyinbo life, Nigeria’s Elumelu schools lady for calling him by first name [Watch]

Deputy Education Minister slams BOGISS authorities over handling of assault case

Across the world, young people are more connected than any generation before them. A smartphone can bridge continents in seconds, friendships can begin with a single click, and conversations never truly have to end. Yet beneath this digital convenience lies a silent crisis that few are willing to confront: an epidemic of loneliness.

For many young people, social media has become a place where lives are carefully curated rather than honestly lived. Every success is posted, every vacation is documented, and every achievement is celebrated. What is rarely shown are the sleepless nights, financial struggles, heartbreaks, and moments of self-doubt.

As a result, countless young people compare their behind-the-scenes reality with someone else’s highlight reel, leaving them feeling inadequate and isolated.

Loneliness is no longer limited to people who live alone. Students surrounded by classmates, employees working in busy offices, and even influencers with millions of followers can feel emotionally disconnected. The number of people around us does not always determine the quality of our relationships.

In many societies, particularly across Africa, conversations about loneliness are often dismissed. Young people are told to “be strong” or “pray about it.” While faith and resilience are valuable, emotional struggles deserve more than clichés. They deserve understanding, compassion, and practical support.

Technology itself is not the enemy. It has transformed education, business, healthcare, and communication. The problem begins when digital interaction replaces genuine human connection.

Sending a heart emoji is not the same as asking someone how they are truly coping. Hundreds of online followers cannot replace one trusted friend who listens without judgment.

Universities and schools also have a role to play. Academic success should not come at the expense of students’ emotional well-being. Institutions should encourage mentorship, peer-support groups, and accessible counselling services that help students navigate the pressures of modern life.

Emotional well-being should become part of everyday conversations rather than an emergency topic discussed only after tragedy strikes.

Families, too, must rethink what support looks like. Providing food, shelter, and education is essential, but emotional availability is equally important. Sometimes, the most powerful gift a parent or guardian can offer is undivided attention.

Young people also have a responsibility to nurture meaningful relationships. Real friendships require time, honesty, and vulnerability. They cannot be measured by likes, comments, or follower counts.

Reaching out to a friend, checking on a classmate, or simply putting the phone away during conversations can rebuild connections that technology sometimes weakens.

Loneliness is not a sign of weakness. It is a human experience that can affect anyone regardless of age, status, or popularity. Recognising it is the first step toward overcoming it.

As societies race to become smarter and more digital, we must not forget what makes us human. Progress should not only be measured by faster internet speeds or more advanced technology, but also by stronger communities, healthier relationships, and people who know they are seen, heard, and valued.

Perhaps the greatest challenge of our generation is not learning how to connect to the internet. It is learning how to reconnect with one another.