Why Isn’t the Minority Speaking About Ofori-Atta? – NDC MP Calls Out Accountability Double Standards

Introduction

Accountability in politics is essential for good governance, yet questions about the sincerity and credibility of opposition parties often arise. Recently, Richard Acheampong, Ranking Member of Parliament’s Budget Committee, publicly challenged the Minority in Parliament for what he perceives as a lack of moral authority in their calls for government accountability. His criticism centers on the Minority’s silence regarding the stewardship of former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta, despite past allegations of incompetence and calls for his removal. This article explores the context, implications, and broader questions raised by this debate.

Key Points

Background

The Minority in Parliament recently held a press conference vowing to hold the government accountable for its actions and policies. However, Richard Acheampong, an NDC MP, questioned the credibility of this stance. He pointed out that during the previous administration, a significant number of MPs—about 80—publicly declared Ken Ofori-Atta, the former Finance Minister, incompetent and called for his removal. Despite these calls, no decisive action was taken until the government’s final days in office.

Acheampong’s remarks came during an interview on Joy FM’s Top Story, where he criticized the Minority’s press conference as “much ado about nothing.” He argued that genuine accountability should begin with addressing unresolved issues from the past, particularly Ofori-Atta’s stewardship, before pointing fingers at the current administration.

Analysis

The Credibility Gap

Acheampong’s main contention is that the Minority lacks the moral standing to demand accountability from the current government while remaining silent on past controversies. This raises a broader question: Can an opposition party credibly call for transparency and responsibility without first addressing unresolved issues from its own time in power?

The reference to Ken Ofori-Atta is particularly significant. As Finance Minister, Ofori-Atta was at the center of several economic challenges, including high public debt and fiscal mismanagement. The fact that a large number of MPs called for his removal suggests deep dissatisfaction with his performance. However, the delayed response from the government and the Minority’s current silence on the matter create an appearance of inconsistency.

Economic Policy and Accountability

Acheampong also used the opportunity to defend the current government’s economic record, particularly highlighting the GoldBod initiative. This policy aims to boost foreign exchange reserves and stabilize the currency by increasing gold exports. According to Acheampong, the initiative has helped the country reach nearly $10 billion, contributing to currency stability.

This argument challenges the Minority’s claim that recent economic improvements are solely due to external factors or the groundwork laid by the previous administration. By emphasizing deliberate policy actions, Acheampong seeks to shift the narrative and hold the Minority accountable for their past inaction.

The Ethics of Political Accountability

The principle that “he who comes to equity must come with clean hands” is central to Acheampong’s critique. In other words, those demanding accountability must first ensure their own records are above reproach. This is a common theme in political discourse, where opposition parties are often scrutinized for their past actions or inactions.

The case of Ken Ofori-Atta is a prime example. If the Minority truly believes in accountability, why have they not pressed for a full accounting of his stewardship? This inconsistency could undermine their credibility and weaken their position as a watchdog of government actions.

Practical Advice

For opposition parties seeking to maintain credibility, it is crucial to address unresolved issues from their own time in power. This includes:

1. **Transparency**: Openly discussing past controversies and the steps taken (or not taken) to resolve them.
2. **Consistency**: Applying the same standards of accountability to their own members as they do to the current government.
3. **Proactive Engagement**: Initiating investigations or inquiries into unresolved issues, even if it may reflect poorly on their own record.

For citizens and voters, it is important to critically evaluate the claims and actions of both the government and the opposition. Look for evidence of genuine accountability, not just rhetoric.

FAQ

Conclusion

The debate sparked by Richard Acheampong highlights the complex nature of political accountability. While the Minority in Parliament has vowed to hold the government accountable, their credibility is called into question by their silence on past controversies, particularly regarding Ken Ofori-Atta. Acheampong’s critique serves as a reminder that genuine accountability requires consistency, transparency, and a willingness to address unresolved issues, regardless of political affiliation.

For the Minority, addressing these concerns could strengthen their position as a credible opposition force. For the public, it underscores the importance of scrutinizing not just the actions of the government, but also the integrity and consistency of those who seek to hold it accountable.