Time vs. Ethics: Analyzing the Ayawaso East By-Election and Party Accountability in Ghana

The Ayawaso East parliamentary by-election has become a potent case study in the tension between procedural deadlines and ethical imperatives within Ghanaian politics. It pits the New Patriotic Party’s (NPP) historical approach of strategic silence against the National Democratic Congress’s (NDC) recent, albeit flawed, move toward internal investigation. This event forces a critical question: when “time is of the essence,” is a rigorous judgment of right and wrong truly non-compulsory? This article dissects the contrasting political reflexes, the legal and procedural realities, and the enduring lessons for democratic health in Ghana.

Introduction: Two Seasons and a By-Election

Ghanaian political commentary often observes two reliable seasons: the wet season and the season of ethical outrage. The Ayawaso East by-election, triggered by the passing of the sitting MP, conveniently delivered both. The central controversy involves serious allegations of vote-buying and monetary inducement during the NDC’s internal primary to select its candidate for the by-election. The ensuing events and reactions from both major parties provide a stark, real-time contrast in how political organizations handle internal misconduct, offering more than just gossip—it provides a diagnostic tool for assessing democratic maturity.

Key Points: A Summary of Contrasts

Before a deep analysis, the core contrasts are:

• The NDC’s Response: Formed an internal committee to investigate allegations, received complaints, reviewed evidence, produced a report, debated it at the Functional Executive Committee level, found no disqualifying proof citing time and constitutional constraints, but publicly acknowledged concerns about monetization and announced sanctions and a broader inquiry.
• The NPP’s Historical Precedent: In the 2024 Ayawaso West Wuogon by-election, the NPP faced similar allegations but employed “strategic ignorance,” issuing no meaningful investigation, closing ranks, and defending the status quo.
• The Legal Track: The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) invited the NDC candidate, Baba Jamal, for questioning. He complied and was granted self-recognisance bail, indicating an ongoing, independent legal process separate from the party’s internal one.
• The Candidate’s Action: Baba Jamal, a former MP and High Commissioner to Nigeria, resigned a prestigious diplomatic post to contest a constituency seat—a move interpreted by critics as folly or by supporters as committed grassroots service.
• The Ultimate Arbiter: The by-election date is fixed by the Electoral Commission (EC). The final judgment on the candidate and the party’s conduct rests with the voters of Ayawaso East.

Background: The Arena of Ghanaian Two-Party Politics

The Structural Context: The NPP vs. NDC Dynamic

Ghana’s Fourth Republic operates a robust but fiercely competitive two-party system dominated by the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC). This duopoly creates a political environment where internal party primaries are often high-stakes, resource-intensive contests. Allegations of vote-buying—where delegates are offered cash, goods, or promises—are perennial concerns, seen as corrupting ideology and undermining grassroots democracy. The response to such allegations has historically become a litmus test for a party’s commitment to internal accountability versus固守 loyalty (固守 loyalty meaning rigid loyalty).

The Specific Catalyst: Ayawaso East By-Election 2026

The by-election was necessitated by the death of the incumbent NDC MP. The subsequent primary to select the party’s flagbearer for the by-election became contentious, with credible reports of delegates receiving money and items to influence their votes. The winner, Baba Jamal Mohammed, a seasoned politician with a history as an MP and diplomat, emerged from this contested process. The public allegations did not dissipate; instead, they followed the candidature into the public domain, forcing the NDC’s national leadership to respond.

Analysis: A Study in Conflicting Political Reflexes

The NDC’s “Inconvenient” Self-Investigation

In a political culture where parties often treat internal scandals like family secrets to be buried, the NDC’s decision to constitute a three-person committee to investigate its own candidate was, in itself, a noteworthy break from pattern. The process followed standard investigative procedure: complaints were gathered, evidence was reviewed, stakeholders were engaged, and a report was produced for debate by the powerful Functional Executive Committee (FEC).

However, the outcome was a masterclass in the collision between ethical aspiration and political reality. The committee reportedly found no basis to disqualify the candidate. The cited reasons were a trilogy of constraints:

1. Time Constraints: The by-election date, set by the independent Electoral Commission, was approaching rapidly.
2. Constitutional Gaps: Ambiguities in the party’s constitution or electoral law regarding the disqualification of a candidate post-primary for alleged infractions.
3. Legal Risk: The potential for the candidate to challenge any disqualification in court, leading to further delays and uncertainty.

The conclusion was stark: the fixed electoral calendar defeated the pursuit of substantive justice. Democracy, in this instance, was scheduled.

The Nuanced Aftermath: Acknowledgement and Promised Reform

The critical, and perhaps most significant, development came after the committee’s report. The NDC leadership did not simply declare “case closed.” They:

• Publicly stated their concerns about the alleged monetization of the internal primary.
• Announced that sanctions would be meted out to individuals found culpable.
• Expanded the committee’s scope for a further, wider inquiry into the monetization culture within its internal elections.

This sequence—investigate, acknowledge limitations, but commit to future reform—represents an “imperfect, evolving, but aware” political reflex. It contrasts sharply with…

The NPP’s “Strategic Ignorance” Playbook

The article rightly directs attention to the NPP’s handling of the 2024 Ayawaso West Wuogon by-election. In that instance, serious allegations of vote-buying and violence surrounded the party’s candidate selection. The NPP’s response was a textbook case of “strategic ignoring.” There was no internal committee, no public acknowledgment of a problem, no promise of sanctions. The party closed ranks, defended its candidate, and framed any external criticism as politically motivated sabotage. Their public theology placed party unity and loyalty above procedural legality and ethical scrutiny.

The contrast is profound: one party (NDC) engaged in the messy, public business of self-examination, even if it fell short of disqualification. The other (NPP) practiced the politics of selective silence. As the original piece argues, any individual or party that condemned the NPP’s 2024 approach has the moral standing to critique the NDC’s 2026 response—and vice versa. Consistency, not partisan convenience, is the metric.

The Independent Legal Pillar: The Office of the Special Prosecutor

Separate from party politics, the state’s anti-corruption architecture activated. The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) invited Baba Jamal for questioning. His compliance—honouring the invitation—and the subsequent grant of bail are procedural facts of immense importance. This demonstrates that regardless of a party’s internal calculus or the EC’s timetable, independent state institutions have a mandate to investigate alleged criminal conduct, such as vote-buying which may constitute corruption or electoral fraud. The legal process continues on a parallel track, governed by its own rules and timelines, ultimately underscoring that party politics is not the only arena of accountability.

The Candidate’s Calculus: Resignation from High Commissioner

Baba Jamal’s decision to resign as Ghana’s High Commissioner to Nigeria—a senior, prestigious diplomatic appointment—to contest a single constituency seat is politically intriguing. Critics see it as a demotion or desperate gamble. A more charitable interpretation, aligned with the article’s thesis, is that it reflects a belief in the primacy of direct constituency representation over the hierarchies of diplomatic service. It suggests a conviction that “street-level engagement” holds more value than “diplomatic cocktail invites.” Whether this is folly or profound commitment, it makes his candidacy a deliberate statement about political service.

Practical Advice: Lessons for Political Actors and Citizens

For Political Parties: Building a Culture of Proactive Accountability

1. Codify Clear Sanctions: Move beyond ad-hoc responses. Parties must have clear, pre-publicized, and consistently applied disciplinary codes for internal electoral malpractice. The penalty for vote-buying must be explicit and severe enough to deter.

2. Decouple Investigation from Timetables: The “time is of the essence” argument is powerful but dangerous. Parties should establish fast-track internal dispute resolution mechanisms that can conclude before a candidate is presented to the EC, or be prepared to withdraw a candidate if serious allegations arise post-selection, even if it risks losing the seat.

3. Transparency Over PR: The NDC’s partial transparency—holding a committee, debating it, reporting outcomes—is superior to the NPP’s historical opacity. Publish redacted committee reports. Name the sanctioned. Explain the rationale. This builds long-term trust, even if it causes short-term embarrassment.

4. Train Delegates and Aspirants: Invest in civic education for delegates on their rights and the corrosive effects of monetization. Train aspirants on ethical campaigning within primaries.

For the Electorate: The Final Audit Power

1. Vote Based on Process, Not Just Person: Voters in Ayawaso East and beyond should evaluate not only the candidate’s capability but also the integrity of the process that produced him. Was the primary free and fair? How did the party handle allegations?

2. Demand Consistency: Reject parties that practice “selective outrage.” Call out your preferred party when it fails. Demand that standards be universal.

3. Utilize the Secret Ballot as a Sanction: The ultimate penalty for a party that fields a candidate tainted by credible allegations of vote-buying is to deny that candidate your vote. The ballot box is the most powerful accountability mechanism.

4. Support Independent Institutions: Advocate for the strengthening and independence of bodies like the Electoral Commission and the Office of the Special Prosecutor. Their effectiveness is a safeguard against party impunity.

For State Institutions: Ensuring a Level Legal Playing Field

1. The Electoral Commission (EC): While its timetable is sacrosanct for logistical integrity, the EC should develop clear guidelines on what evidence of internal party misconduct (e.g., proven vote-buying in primaries) would trigger a refusal to accept a candidate’s nomination. This must be based on law, not discretion.

2. The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP): Must pursue all credible allegations of vote-buying with equal vigor, regardless of which party is involved. The public is watching for non-partisan application of the law.

3. The Judiciary: Must be prepared to adjudicate any legal challenges arising from party primaries or candidate disqualifications swiftly and on merit, to prevent the “time constraint” loophole from becoming a standard excuse for inaction.

FAQ: Addressing Common Questions

Q1: Does the NDC’s investigation exonerate Baba Jamal?

A: No. The NDC’s internal committee found insufficient evidence to disqualify him based on its mandate, timeline, and standards. This is a party procedural outcome, not a legal exoneration. The separate OSP investigation is ongoing and carries different standards and potential penalties. The two processes are complementary, not duplicative.

Q2: Is “time is of the essence” a valid excuse for avoiding accountability?

A: It is a practical constraint, not a moral absolution. Governance often involves balancing competing timelines. The excuse becomes invalid if a party uses it as a permanent shield to avoid ever conducting a serious investigation. A responsible party builds systems to conduct inquiries within required deadlines. The NDC’s action of investigating *at all*, despite the time pressure, is what differentiates it from the NPP’s past tactic of using “time” as a reason to do nothing.

Q3: Why does the article focus so much on the NPP’s past actions?

A: Political analysis requires context and comparison. The NPP’s handling of the 2024 Ayawaso West Wuogon by-election is the closest, most relevant precedent. It establishes a baseline of “strategic ignorance.” Evaluating the NDC’s 2026 response without this context is incomplete. The piece argues for a single, consistent standard of accountability, which necessitates examining both sides’ historical reflexes.

Q4: Can parties ever fully eliminate vote-buying in primaries?

A: Eradication is an aspirational goal. The immediate, practical goal is to create a culture of deterrence through transparent rules, credible sanctions, and delegate education. The cost (financial, reputational, disciplinary) of getting caught must outweigh the perceived benefit of buying influence. The NDC’s public promise of sanctions, if credibly implemented, is a step toward this deterrence.

Q5: What is the real significance of this by-election episode?

A: Its significance transcends Ayawaso East. It serves as a public stress test for Ghana’s democratic norms. It asks: Do parties prioritize ethical processes over short-term electoral gain? Do they treat internal democracy as a hollow ritual or a core value? The differing responses map the spectrum of political culture in Ghana, from defensive opacity to reluctant transparency. The “lesson” is that democracy is financed in sunlight, even when it’s uncomfortable.

Conclusion: The Unfinished Business of Democratic Finance

The Ayawaso East by-election episode crystallizes a fundamental democratic dilemma: the clash between the immutable clock of electoral timetables and the fluid, essential process of ethical reckoning. The NDC’s response was imperfect—a probe that produced no disqualification but generated public admission and promised reform. The NPP’s historical reflex is a study in avoidance. The OSP’s independent action provides a crucial legal backstop.

The core lesson is not about canonizing one party or demonizing the other. It is about recognizing and rewarding a specific political reflex: the willingness to probe rather than pretend, to acknowledge rather than deny, and to promise reform rather than bury the issue. As the original insight states: “You cannot throw a baby out with the bathwater, but neither must you pretend the water is clean.”

For Ghana’s democracy to mature, both major parties must evolve