A file photo
In Ghana, it is a recurring pattern that public demonstrations are orchestrated and spearheaded by opposition parties, with the apparent aim of undermining the popularity and credibility of the ruling party rather than advocating for the
structural reforms necessary to set the nation on a more prosperous course.
This practice has been notably consistent – when the National Democratic Congress (NDC) held the reins of power, the members of the New Patriotic Party
(NPP) took the lead in organizing these demonstrations. Conversely, when the NPP finds itself in power, the NDC supporters carry the protest banner.
Public or citizen activism can influence public policy and governance. A democratic society can be transformed when patriotic and nonpartisan individuals can work to reform institutional and organizational frameworks. However, in Ghana, the intention to replace one kleptocratic party with another kleptocratic one without comprehensive institutional and legal reforms has not been helpful. Citizens must focus on the institutions and laws allowing these political and economic vampires to suck the country's economic and financial blood.
Ghanaian demonstrations have not been successful due to their organization by political partisans rather than genuine patriotic citizens seeking governance change regardless of the ruling political party. Demonstrations led by political partisans often attract supporters primarily from their party's base. This limited inclusivity can undermine the potential impact of protests because they
may not represent the diverse voices and concerns of the entire population. In contrast, demonstrations that involve a broader cross-section of society may have more legitimacy and effectiveness.
Political partisans may focus on immediate goals, such as influencing a policy or pushing for a specific party's interests. While they may achieve short-term successes, this approach does not lead to sustained governance improvements or address systemic issues that require non-partisan solutions.
Demonstrations organized by political partisans can contribute to polarization by framing issues in a partisan context. This polarization can hinder constructive dialogue and cooperation across party lines, making it difficult to find lasting solutions to complex governance problems.
Some members of the public may view demonstrations led by political partisans with skepticism, perceiving them as self-serving actions rather than genuine expressions of public concern. This lack of trust can diminish the effectiveness of such protests.
Demonstrations organized by political partisans are often driven by specific party agendas, which may not necessarily align with the broader interests and needs of the country. This can lead to a disconnect between the protesters' demands and the nation's greater good.
Genuine, lasting change in governance often requires a consensus that transcends political party boundaries. Protests organized by political partisans may not be well-suited to building the broad-based support needed for long-term reforms.
While demonstrations organized by political partisans may have some short-term impact and visibility, they may not be as effective in achieving sustained governance change and addressing the needs of all citizens. Broader-based movements that involve a cross-section of society and prioritize non-partisan solutions are good at addressing systemic issues and contributing to long-term
lasting improvements in governance.
The lack of trust and credibility associated with demonstrations led by political partisans is a significant challenge that can undermine the effectiveness of such protests. While these demonstrations may achieve short-term political goals, they often struggle to garner broad-based public support and may contribute to a toxic political environment marked by polarization and
suspicion. To succeed in the long term, protests must be perceived as genuine expressions of public concern and conducted in a non-partisan fashion.