The consequences of party turnover

The 2024 election resulted in party turnover.

It appears Ghanaians are sticking with the eight-year party rotation for now.

Perhaps a day will come when a party in government will perform so exceedingly well that Ghanaians will naturally “Break the 8” without an incumbent party making it an intentional campaign message. 

Party turnover is not necessarily a bad thing. In Afrobarometer Round 10 (2024), 61 per cent of Ghanaians agreed that “In a democracy, it is better if power sometimes changes hands in elections from one political party to another.” 

Moreover, elections have so far become the main accountability tool in the hands of Ghanaian voters and the key mechanism for expressing their dissatisfaction with the performance of a given government.

I believe it is the reason why John Mahama’s government was voted out in the 2016 election.

It is also the reason why the New Patriotic Party (NPP) lost the 2024 election. 

The consequences

There are many consequences of party turnover.

The one I want to highlight in this piece is the cycle of partisan narratives on matters of good governance. What do I mean by that?

It is the phenomenon where partisans in government, process matters of governance differently than in opposition. 

The reverse is also true where partisans in opposition, process matters of governance differently than in government. Let me add that it is not a phenomenon unique to Ghana.

There is another way in which this phenomenon manifests itself.

The very use of power and government actions that a partisan is willing to defend and support when their preferred party is in power, becomes a source of worry and vocal condemnation when in opposition. 

In the past week, the government’s directive that persons hired in the public service after the December 7, 2024, elections be terminated has become a major topic of discussion in the public square.

In ensuing conversations, it is interesting to observe references to similar actions that occurred after the December 7, 2016, election and how partisans processed those actions back then compared to now.

What is even more worrying is that in the ensuing partisan spats, new opposition partisans do not pledge to break the cycle, but rather appear to promise a continuation of the cycle.

In the same light, new ruling party partisans do not make a similar pledge either.

Does it mean we must expect this to continue forever?

Breaking the cycle

I do not expect ruling and opposition party partisans to agree all the time. Given their ideological orientations and policy preferences, there will be moments of disagreement.

And as former president Akufo-Addo said, “Dissent is never a threat to any subject under discussion.” 

But the place we must strive to get to be is one where time-honoured principles of good governance are embraced without appeals to our partisan instincts.

How we do that is a regular commitment to those time-honoured principles through our actions and the narratives we construct to interpret everyday matters of governance and politics.

It is not something that happens overnight.

But when practised daily, it eventually becomes a habit of the heart. 

However, in working with data from the Afrobarometer survey, I often ask why trust in institutions among partisans changes whenever there is party turnover.

What do I mean? When a partisan’s preferred party is in power, their trust in institutions improves.

The reverse immediately becomes true when their preferred party is in opposition – trust in institutions declines.

This is not to advocate for a total eschewing of our partisan preferences.

No. It is a call to re-evaluate how we express those preferences on certain matters.

For me, it is the key to building strong systems of good governance.

It is the key to strengthening our democracy as we work towards consolidation.

We must also revisit the governance rules on several important matters.

If it is necessary to reduce the amount of discretion granted to public officials, then let’s do that.

For example, part of the angst over this “employment termination” directive is the fact that the new government believes it violates good governance because it occurred during the transition period to a new government.

In the same vein, we must also acknowledge that an outgoing government’s mandate does not end because an election is lost.

The mandate ends when a new government is sworn in.

But be that as it may, as a country, if there are substantive decisions we believe must not be made during transition periods to a new government, perhaps we need to make them very explicit in our governance rules.

Whether we do this or not, time will tell.

However, one I think I know for sure is this — a day should come when we break this cycle of partisanship. 
 
The writer is the Project Director, Democracy Project