The anticipation is finally over. On October 16, 2025, Alan John Kwadwo Kyerematen officially transformed his Movement for Change into a full-fledged political party — the United Party (UP).
While few were surprised by the move, given his split from the New Patriotic Party (NPP) in 2023, what has stirred debate is his decision to resurrect the historic name “United Party” — a title deeply rooted in Ghana’s post-independence political evolution.
United Party
The original United Party, formed in 1957, was not merely a political label.
It was born out of Dr Kwame Nkrumah’s Avoidance of Discrimination Act (ADA), which outlawed ethnic and regional political parties to promote national cohesion.
In compliance, opposition parties with distinct ethnic and regional leanings merged into one national front — the United Party (UP).
That union included the National Liberation Movement (NLM) led by Baffour Akoto and K.A. Busia; the Northern People’s Party (NPP I) led by Simon Diedong Dombo with members such as Abayefa Karbo and Mumuni Bawumia(father of former Vice President Dr Mahamudu Bawumia); the Muslim Association Party (MAP) under Alhaji Imoro Egala; the Anlo Youth Organisation (AYO) led by Lawyer Modesto Apaloo; the Ga Shifimo Kpee of Emmanuel Obetsebi-Lamptey; and the Togoland Congress (TC) of S.G. Antor.
Over time, that UP tradition evolved into the Progress Party (PP) of Busia in 1969, the Popular Front Party (PFP) under Victor Owusu in 1979, and ultimately the New Patriotic Party (NPP) in 1992.
Alan’s decision to reclaim the UP name has clearly unsettled the NPP hierarchy, with reports of some executives exploring legal options against one of their own historic pillars.
For many older members, the move also evokes memories of 1979, when internal splits within the PFP, another UP offshoot, weakened its electoral chances.
But beyond the emotion lies a deeper question: Is Alan Kyerematen’s action a betrayal — or a historical restoration?
Alan’s ‘birthright’
The NPP traces its ideological ancestry directly to the UP of 1957, but over time, it has forged its own distinct identity — shaped by the UP’s liberal democratic philosophy, the influence of its founding fathers, and the legacy sustained by successive generations.
Founding figures such as B.J. da Rocha, Prof. Albert Adu Boahen, Peter Ala Adjetey, R.R. Amponsah, J.A. Kufuor, Appenteng Appiah-Menka, Alhaji Malik Alhassan Yakubu, and C.K. Tedam embodied the diverse blocs that united under the UP banner. Others, including Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo and Jones Ofori-Atta, inherited conviction and purpose from their illustrious forebears — Dr J.B. Danquah, Edward Akufo-Addo, and William Ofori-Atta (Paa Willie).
While the NPP has upheld the UP’s enduring principles — the rule of law, private enterprise, and liberal democracy— its strongest base has remained in the very regions that anchored the UP’s early strength—Ashanti and parts of the Eastern Region.
As a product of that lineage — through his Asante paternal heritage and decades of service to the NPP — Alan Kyerematen may simply be answering history’s call, asserting his share of a tradition he helped sustain.
His father, Dr Alexander Atta Yaw Kyerematen, a respected academic, diplomat, and cultural scholar, was a staunch member of the United Party, which evolved into the Progress Party after the 1966 coup. That ideological foundation shaped Alan’s political identity within the Danquah–Busia–Dombo tradition.
From 1992 to 2025, none within the NPP can claim the UP heritage more authentically than Alan. He embodies both the ancestral link and the ideological conviction that define that historic political lineage.
Why “UP” Name
There are several compelling reasons Alan may have intentionally revived such a historic name. It represents a symbolic re-enactment of the purity and unity that characterised the UP’s formation and its broad appeal across regions.
It reflects his admiration for the virtues, courage, and sacrifice of the UP’s founding fathers, who, against all odds, stood for justice and democratic freedom in the years after independence.
In essence, Alan and his movement seek to continue the UP legacy — preserving its memory as a form of symbolic immortality and marking its rebirth as a statement of renewal and national purpose.
Adopting a historical name is never mere imitation; it is an act of connection, remembrance, and redefinition — a bridge between past and present, carrying forward the ideals that once united Ghana’s opposition under one banner.
That, the UP+ movement insists, is what sets them apart from those who merely claim ties to the original UP.
Ban on party names
After the February 24, 1966, coup that overthrew Nkrumah and the CPP, the National Liberation Council (NLC) banned all political parties and suspended the 1960 Constitution.
When politics resumed in 1968, the NLC barred new parties from using the names, symbols, or emblems of the old ones — notably the CPP and the UP.
As a result, the UP tradition re-emerged as the Progress Party (PP) under Dr K.A. Busia, while the CPP resurfaced as the National Alliance of Liberals (NAL) led by Komla Agbeli Gbedemah. So, legally, the UP ceased to exist, although its spirit lived on through the Danquah–Busia–Dombo political tradition — the same current that later gave birth to the NPP. Which name is the NPP fighting over? A dead name?
1992 Constitution
The 1992 Constitution restored full political freedoms and ended all prior bans on names and symbols. Article 55 guarantees every Ghanaian the right to form or join political parties and participate in shaping government policy.
In effect, the Constitution allows for the revival of historical party names — including the CPP or UP — provided the groups are properly registered with the Electoral Commission (EC) and meet all legal requirements under the Political Parties Law (PNDCL 281).
There is no constitutional restriction on reusing earlier names.
Yet, in the early 1990s, when Nkrumaist groups such as the People’s Convention Party (PCP) and the National Convention Party (NCP) attempted to re-register the CPP name, the EC initially refused, citing historical sensitivities and disputes over ownership.
This changed in 1996, when a High Court ruled that nothing in the Constitution or the Political Parties Law barred the revival of old political names or symbols.
The court held that once the CPP name became available, the faction that lawfully registered it — through the PCP–NCP merger — could rightfully claim it.
That landmark ruling reaffirmed the constitutional spirit of continuity and political pluralism, allowing any group to revive or reinterpret historic traditions — if they complied with EC procedures.
So, if the Constitution allows it, and history validates it — what exactly is Alan Kyerematen’s crime?
