Ghana's political landscape has long been dominated by the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC). A crucial aspect of these parties' internal governance has sparked debate: the treatment of candidates who lose primary contests. In a presidential primary, only one candidate wins, while others, sometimes with significant vote tallies, are labeled "losers" and often sidelined. Critics argue that this approach wastes valuable political talent and grassroots support, urging parties to rethink their strategies.
The numbers from the NPP's January 2026 presidential primary illustrate this point. Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia won with 110,643 votes, or 56.48% of valid votes. However, Kennedy Ohene Agyapong, the second-place candidate, garnered 46,554 votes, and Bryan Acheampong, the third-place candidate, received 36,303 votes. These numbers represent tens of thousands of delegates and party supporters who identify with these candidates' ideas, leadership styles, and networks. Rather than discarding them, parties could utilize this talent to strengthen their overall performance.
Fuseini Abdulai Braimah, a concerned observer, has proposed that Ghana's political parties rethink their approach to internal elections. He suggests that, while the winner of a presidential primary should take the mandate, the party should also find ways to retain the talent demonstrated by other candidates. This could involve assigning meaningful responsibilities, such as vice-presidential running mate, parliamentary leadership, or national party organization roles, commensurate with their experience and expertise.
Braimah's proposal is not specific to the NPP or NDC but applies to all political parties in Ghana. He emphasizes that this approach should not be an automatic entitlement or a rigid formula but rather a flexible strategy to maximize the party's potential. By doing so, parties can turn competition into an investment in the party, rather than a battle where most of the investment is discarded after the votes are counted.
However, there are constitutional limitations to consider. The 1992 Constitution requires a presidential nomination to designate a person to serve as Vice-President, and the Speaker of Parliament is elected by Members of Parliament. Parties cannot simply convert primary rankings into state offices. Article 60, 63, and 95 provide critical distinctions that must be respected. A party can create mechanisms for retaining political talent without bypassing the Constitution.
The American experience offers a lesson and a warning. The original U.S. Constitution did not establish the modern system of presidential and vice-presidential candidates running together on a ticket. While there are similarities, Ghanaian parties must navigate their own constitutional and governance frameworks. The focus should be on using party rules intelligently within constitutional boundaries to strengthen Ghanaian democracy.
The real question is whether Ghanaian political parties can move away from a winner-takes-all mentality in their internal elections. This shift in approach could have far-reaching consequences, not only for the NPP and NDC but also for Ghana's democratic development as a whole. By engaging in serious discussions and exploring alternatives, parties can work towards a more inclusive and effective governance model.
Key points
- Losing primary candidates in Ghana often possess significant political talent and grassroots support that could be wasted if not utilized by their parties.
- A potential solution is for parties to assign meaningful responsibilities to these candidates, such as vice-presidential running mate or parliamentary leadership roles.
- Any approach must respect Ghana's constitutional limitations, particularly regarding the designation of Vice-President and Speaker of Parliament.
