Moneycracy and Two-Party Dominance: Ghana’s Pivotal 2024 Election Battle

In the months leading up to Ghana’s election on December 7, 2024, numerous Ghanaian analysts were confident about two key outcomes. Firstly, they believed that either the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP) or the main opposition, the National Democratic Congress (NDC), would ultimately secure the presidency, despite other parties participating in the race. Secondly, they anticipated that neither of these dominant parties would significantly curb the pervasive influence of money in politics—a practice widely criticized by citizens as a major factor contributing to the corruption plaguing their government and society. These predictions proved accurate when the NDC emerged victorious, with John Mahama, who had lost to the NPP in the 2016 election, reclaiming the presidency. Contrary to expectations, corruption was not the primary issue driving voter behavior. Instead, the deteriorating state of Ghana’s economy was the main concern. Many voters held the incumbent NPP and its pro-market policies responsible for the economic mismanagement that had severely impacted the country. Nonetheless, as seen in previous election cycles, the issue of corruption remained a significant worry. Former auditor-general Daniel Yaw Domelevo described the election period not as a time for voting, but as an “auctioning year” where candidates compete fiercely for positions. Additionally, the Presbyterian Church of Ghana highlighted in a statement from its general assembly that the nation’s democracy is under threat from “moneycracy,” a term that has become more prevalent recently. According to the church, this system allows candidates with questionable motives to run for office, not to serve the national interest, but to pursue their own personal gains. Despite these challenges, many Ghanaians appreciate the relatively peaceful and orderly conduct of their elections since the return to democratic governance in 1992. Although there have been occasional instances of violence, these have been less severe compared to some neighboring African countries. While the NPP and NDC have different bases of ethnic and regional support, most candidates strive to avoid making overtly ethnic appeals. However, election campaigns in Ghana typically remain highly polarized, and the 2024 race was no exception. Nevertheless, these intense campaigns have not significantly hindered the peaceful transfer of power. Since the NDC first lost to the NPP in the 2000 elections, there have been four successful transitions between the two parties, each maintaining power for eight years through two consecutive presidential and legislative terms. International observers often commend these transitions as evidence of Ghana’s solidifying democracy. However, many Ghanaians are less convinced. Surveys by Afrobarometer consistently show that a clear majority of citizens would like to move beyond the current two-party dominance, advocating for greater participation from other political parties. Ghanaian political scientist Kwame Ninsin explains that the existing two-party system is a result of an “elite consensus” between the NDC and NPP. According to him, the parties alternate in power to “control the state for private accumulation.” The 1992 constitution of Ghana did not anticipate the challenges posed by “moneycracy” or electoral corruption, but certain constitutional provisions have inadvertently facilitated these issues. As I discuss in my recent book, the Constitution grants extensive appointment powers to the strong executive presidency. Beyond appointing cabinet ministers and a large presidential staff, the president also selects the heads of departments and agencies, leaders of state-owned enterprises, members of various state institution boards, and 30 percent of district assembly members—nearly 4,000 positions in total. This vast array of potential patronage jobs raises the stakes for winning or retaining office. Both major parties release comprehensive manifestos covering a wide range of issues, and candidates emphasize these topics in their campaign speeches. However, behind the scenes, financial incentives also play a crucial role. While direct cash payments to voters are illegal, both the NPP and NDC have been accused—during this election cycle as well—of attempting to influence voters through money and gifts such as textiles, bicycles, sewing machines, and other goods. The influence of money is particularly evident in the primary elections each party conducts to select their candidates. These primaries are managed by electoral colleges consisting of party executives, constituency leaders, and officeholders. In the absence of laws prohibiting vote-buying within parties, bribery often occurs openly. As former NPP Chairman Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey advised aspiring parliamentary candidates, “if you have money, then use the money.” Before his passing in 2020, former President Jerry Rawlings, who led Ghana through much of the 1980s and 1990s and founded the NDC, expressed frustration with this practice. He criticized both parties for using “huge monetary and material inducements of offensive proportions” to secure nominations “in favor of the highest bidder.” Despite these behaviors, both parties frequently condemn corruption and vow to tackle it aggressively. However, my analysis of Transparency International’s corruption rankings and Afrobarometer’s public opinion surveys reveals no significant differences in corruption levels between NDC- and NPP-led administrations. Typically, new governments launch numerous anti-corruption initiatives and prosecute former officials at the outset, but these efforts tend to wane as they become more established. The opposition party usually intensifies its anti-corruption rhetoric when campaigning to regain power. The recent election cycle followed this trend. Outgoing President Nana Akufo-Addo strongly emphasized his fight against corruption during his successful 2016 campaign, but Mahamudu Bawumia, the NPP’s 2024 presidential candidate, did not prioritize the issue. The NPP’s extensive election manifesto only mentioned corruption twice. In contrast, Mahama, his running mate Jane Opoku-Agyemang, and other NDC candidates consistently criticized the outgoing administration’s corruption and related wrongdoings. “We will hold those who have misconducted themselves accountable,” Mahama declared in his inaugural campaign speech, a commitment he reiterated at his final campaign rally. However, the question remains whether the new leaders will follow through on these promises. Based on historical patterns, it is likely they will, but only to a limited extent. For this reason, Samuel Kofi Darkwa, a Ghanaian political scientist, advises that “we cannot leave it to only politicians.” Fortunately, the same constitution that neglected to address the dangers of money politics also established several independent monitoring bodies. Additionally, it enshrined numerous rights and freedoms that empower activists and citizens to initiate their own efforts. Ghana, with roots tracing back to the British colonial era, has a long-standing tradition of upholding the rule of law, albeit sometimes inconsistently and imperfectly. In recent years, laws related to corruption, fraud, and related misconduct have been periodically updated and strengthened. However, the judiciary often faces challenges in enforcing these laws. While a few judges have been compromised by corruption, the primary issue is political pressure from national authorities. The attorney general, appointed by the ruling party, frequently pushes for prosecutions against members of the opposition. Although there has been some progress, perceptions of partisan bias within the judicial system persist. This issue was a driving factor behind anti-corruption activists advocating for the appointment of an independent prosecutor to handle high-level corruption cases without immediate political pressures. In 2017, the Akufo-Addo administration established the Office of the Special Prosecutor. While not entirely independent, the prosecutor has pursued numerous cases involving public procurement officials, bank executives, police recruiters, and even a sitting minister, from both political parties. Additionally, several other watchdog institutions, despite lacking prosecutorial powers, have exposed instances of corruption. These include the auditor-general’s office and the constitutionally mandated Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice, which annually addresses thousands of citizen complaints and has led to the removal of several ministers. Completely independent of the government, other sectors also play significant roles in combating corruption. Ghana’s vibrant independent media, encompassing daily and weekly newspapers and hundreds of local radio stations, have uncovered many high-level misconduct cases. The country is home to numerous civil society organizations, some specifically focused on fighting corruption. Individually and in coalitions, these groups have successfully advocated for laws that protect whistleblowers, enhance the right to information, and oversee the management of Ghana’s oil revenues. Just months before the election, various civil society organizations and trade unions organized vigorous street protests against illegal and unregulated small-scale gold mining. While their primary concern was the environmental damage and water pollution caused by such activities, the protests also effectively challenged one of the illicit funding sources for local party candidates. Although the election campaign has concluded for now, the struggle of Ghanaians to purify their political system continues.