Significance of Oct. 1 IPAC meeting
The Electoral Commission (EC) convened a meeting on October 1, 2024, in response to concerns raised by the National Democratic Congress (NDC) regarding discrepancies in the voters’ register and their request for a forensic audit of the register and EC’s IT system.
Advertisement
The meeting was attended by the EC Chair and her Deputies, three representatives from each political party, members from civil society organisations (CSOs), development partners and diplomats. Additionally, many flag-bearers of the smaller parties' independent candidates were present.
During the meeting, the EC Chair and her IT Director addressed the NDC's concerns through presentations. The EC Chair also announced the commission’s decision to allow media coverage of all future IPAC meetings to promote transparency and accountability.
It was clarified by the EC that the call for a forensic audit was premature, as the final register was not yet ready. They explained that compiling the final voters' register was a multi-step process, beginning with voter registration and followed by various auditing processes before the final register is compiled.
The EC assured the meeting that once the provisional register was ready, copies would be provided to the parties, published on their website, and subjected to another voter exhibition to ensure the robustness of the final register.
The EC also acknowledged that due to the NDC’s request, they approached all processes with extra vigilance.
Overall, the EC’s presentation was well-received with praise from all the parties in attendance. The political parties also commended the NDC for their vigilance in highlighting the issues and their persistence, which led to the meeting that now allows media coverage of all future IPAC meetings.
NPP/NDC
The New Patriotic Party (NPP) also commended the NDC and referred to the NDC's previous stance when the NPP made similar demands on the EC. They sought an explanation from the NDC about what had changed for them to now support what they had previously criticised the NPP for demanding.
Other Trending Stories
The NDC representatives expressed dissatisfaction as their request for a forensic audit was not considered. They described the EC’s response as akin to mopping the floor when the roof is leaking, rather than fixing the roof.
To the NDC, addressing the discrepancies in the register without conducting a forensic audit of the register and the EC’s IT system is equivalent to choosing to mop the room when the roof is leaking, without carrying out a forensic audit to trace and deal with the perpetrators.
They expressed concern that the issues might resurface in November, making it too late to address them, likening it to the potential of doing another 'mopping'.
Takeaway
First, the NDC’s vigilance has helped the EC to be more particular about each process to ensure that the mistakes the NDC noticed are addressed and no further mistakes are made.
The EC’s reactiveness and willingness to advance Ghana’s democracy made it possible to have the media cover the IPAC meeting live for the first time. The EC has also decided to allow the media to cover all future IPAC meetings, introducing an added layer of transparency into the activities of the EC.
However, the decision to allow media coverage of all future IPAC meetings has its pros and cons and the potential impact of this move on Ghana’s democracy.
Pros of media coverage
1. Transparency: Broadcasting IPAC meetings can enhance transparency, allowing the public to witness decision-making processes and fostering trust in the political system.
2. Accountability: Public scrutiny can hold the EC and political parties accountable, potentially reducing indiscipline and promoting ethical behaviour.
3. Informed Electorate: Media coverage can provide voters with insights into party positions on key issues, helping them make informed decisions during elections.
4. Engagement: Increased media coverage can stimulate public interest in electoral processes, encouraging active participation in democracy.
5. Reducing Misrepresentation: Live media coverage can prevent misrepresentation of discussions, ensuring the public receives accurate information.
Cons of media coverage
1. Misinterpretation: There is a risk of media outlets misinterpreting or sensationalising discussions, leading to misinformation and public misunderstanding. To address this, the EC and CSOs should take steps to educate the media on how to cover such meetings and similar ones.
Advertisement
2. Internal Conflicts: Public exposure of internal disagreements can weaken IPAC's unity and undermine its public image.
3. Artificial Environment: Overexposure to media can hinder meaningful dialogue, leading to less spontaneous contributions and a focus on scoring political points rather than advancing democracy.
Looking ahead
There is a growing call for a comprehensive national database encompassing various identification systems to address issues with voter registration. It is essential for political parties to remain vigilant and provide constructive feedback to improve the system. Instead of criticising past wrongs, parties should support efforts to advance Ghana's democracy.
Finding a balance between reaping the benefits of media coverage at IPAC meetings and mitigating the associated dangers is crucial for maintaining a healthy democratic process.
The writer is a Political Scientist
Advertisement