Religious leaders, electoral violence and constitutional review
Tuesday’s Akwatia by-election was a closely fought, two-horse race between candidates of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and the New Patriotic Party (NPP); won by the former. Like other recent by-elections, there was a fear of electoral violence. It was alleged that party thugs would seek to disrupt voting in order to try to favour their party.
The Electoral Commission (EC) deployed 484 electoral officers to the 119 polling stations across the Akwatia Constituency for the parliamentary by-election. They were complemented by more than 5,000 police personnel deployed for the day’s polling in the Eastern Region mining town.
Eastern Regional Director of the EC, John Appiah Baffoe, stated that both NPP and NDC had pledged their support to the commission to ensure that the by-election would be peaceful and devoid of any violence which, as it turned out, it was.
Religious leaders and electoral violence
Prior to polling day, religious leaders had expressed their wish that voting would be peaceful and that no voter should be intimidated by the fear or threat of violence to vote for a certain party or not to vote at all.
Seven religious leaders made urgent appeals to the two major political parties contesting the Akwatia by-election, requesting them not to engage the services of private security persons, especially heavily built men, known in local parlance as ‘machomen’.
That, they indicated, would help make the election peaceful and free of violence.
The religious leaders stated that the NDC and the NPP should allow only the police to handle any security issue relating to the conduct of the election.
The religious leaders were the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of Ghana, Rt Rev. Dr Abraham Nana Opare-Kwakye, the Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Koforidua, Most Rev. Joseph Afrifah-Agyekum, and the Bishop of the Koforidua Diocese of the Anglican Church, Rt Rev. Felix Odei Annancy.
The rest were the Bishop of the Koforidua Diocese of the Methodist Church, Rt Rev. Dennis Joseph Boadu; the Executive President of the Ghana Baptist Convention, Rev. Enoch Nii Narh Thompson; the Eastern Regional Chief Imam, Alhaji Yusif Amudani Sulemana, and the Most Reverend Professor Johnson Kwabena Asamoah-Gyadu, Presiding Bishop of the Methodist Church of Ghana
Most Reverend Professor Johnson Kwabena Asamoah-Gyadu stated that ‘acts of bullying and violence which normally characterise elections are serious litmus test for Ghana’s fledgling democratic path, and every fruitful leader ready to serve the country would not want to gain power by deceitful and bullying means’.
He reminded both the NDC and the NPP that it was unacceptable that people might lose their lives during the course of elections as ‘leaders were elected to serve the nation to the glory of God’.
In addition, he advised politicians against voting buying, adding that such practice did not represent a true reflection of the chosen candidates to lead the country.
Finally, he cautioned the youth not to be used by politicians to cause violence for their personal gains.
The Presiding Bishop’s reference to ‘leaders … elected to serve the nation to the glory of God’ reflects how many religious leaders in Ghana view the purpose of presidential and parliamentary elections: to elect leaders and representatives seeking power in order to rule for ‘the glory of God’.
Constitutional review and religious leaders
This raises an interesting constitutional issue, given Ghana’s years as a secular liberal democracy during the Fourth Republic. Religion, notably Christianity, has long had a significant public voice in Ghana.
This was reflected in the pre-election statements from leaders of the Presbyterian, Catholic, Anglican, Methodist, and Baptist churches, plus that of the Eastern Regional Chief Imam.
Ghana’s 1992 Constitution is silent on the topic of religious leaders commenting on political issues, including in relation to electoral violence.
However, many Ghanaians would be flabbergasted if their religious leaders did not speak out on prominent political and social issues, given the former’s societal prominence.
This may simply be a case of religious leaders speaking as private citizens, seeking to make their personal views known on topical issues, which is, of course, perfectly acceptable for all citizens in a democracy such as Ghana’s.
In addition, religious leaders may claim institutional justification for their public pronouncements, thus acquiring increased gravity and authority.
The Constitution Review Committee (CRC), established by President John Dramani Mahama on January 25 and chaired by Professor H. Kwasi Prempeh, was invited to identify key areas of the constitution that might need updating to improve governance.
The committee is scheduled to present its report to the President in October 2025.
In compiling its report, the CRC held consultative sessions with various stakeholders.
They included the Council of State, the Trades Union Congress, chiefs, Tindaana (spiritual leaders and custodians of sacred groves and traditional land in various communities in northern Ghana), traditional leaders, regional ministers, Metropolitan, Municipal and District Chief Executives, Civil Society Organisations, Persons with Disabilities, and members of the general public.
Religious leaders, it appears, were not institutionally consulted by the CRC. This omission may reflect the CRC’s main concern: improved governance in Ghana’s secular liberal democracy via constitutional reforms, a process which does not recognise religious leaders and institutions as formal partners in Ghana’s liberal democracy.
The writer is an Emeritus Professor of Politics, London Metropolitan University, UK
