Selective Activism in Ghana’s Civil Society: The bane of Non-Partisan Advocacy

Civil society organizations (CSOs) play a critical role in promoting democracy, accountability, and social justice in Ghana. Their advocacy, community engagement, and watchdog functions contribute to shaping public policy, holding government accountable, and ensuring that the voices of citizens are heard. However, some sections of Ghana’s civil society have come under scrutiny for selective activism, where they appear more vocal in their criticisms when certain political parties are in power and less so when aligned parties hold office. This phenomenon, driven by partisan bias, raises questions about the credibility, integrity, and effectiveness of CSOs in their role as neutral defenders of democratic values. This write-up explores the causes, manifestations, and impacts of selective activism in Ghana’s civil society, along with strategies for strengthening non-partisanship to enhance the effectiveness of CSOs.

1. Defining Civil Society Organizations

Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) are non-governmental, non-profit entities that operate independently from the state to represent the interests and values of citizens. CSOs encompass a wide range of organizations, including non-governmental organizations (NGOs), community-based organizations (CBOs), advocacy groups, professional associations, labor unions, faith-based organizations, and social movements. While they vary in size, scope, and focus, all CSOs share a common goal: to address social, economic, and political issues that impact communities and to foster civic engagement.

CSOs play a vital role in promoting democracy, social justice, human rights, environmental protection, and public accountability. In organizing themselves around shared values and objectives, CSOs serve as intermediaries between citizens and the state, advocating for policies, holding leaders accountable, and empowering communities through education and mobilization. For example, organizations like Transparency International focus on anti-corruption initiatives, while local CSOs may address community-specific issues, such as access to healthcare or education. In democratic contexts, CSOs contribute to a pluralistic society by allowing diverse voices to participate in public discourse. They provide a platform for marginalized groups, encourage government accountability, and promote transparency in decision-making processes. CSOs thus help strengthen the social fabric by fostering dialogue, building trust among citizens, and promoting values of inclusivity and civic responsibility.

2. Contextualizing Political Activism in Ghana

Political activism in Ghana has played a central role in the country’s political history, shaping its journey from colonial rule through independence to the present-day multiparty democracy. From the anti-colonial movements of the 20th century to the advocacy for human rights and governance reforms in the 21st century, political activism has evolved in response to Ghana’s social, economic, and political contexts. Activism in Ghana is shaped by a range of factors, including historical struggles, socio-economic realities, political dynamics, and the role of civil society. Understanding the nature and impact of political activism in Ghana requires an exploration of these contexts and how they inform the methods, goals, and challenges of activists. This section provides a comprehensive look at the history and evolution of political activism in Ghana, examining its significance, challenges, and the role of civil society in promoting democratic governance.

A. Historical Roots of Political Activism in Ghana

Political activism in Ghana can be traced back to the early 20th century, when anti-colonial movements and nationalist sentiments gained momentum. Kwame Nkrumah, Ghana’s founding Prime Minister and first President, was a central figure in this early wave of activism. His organization, the Convention People’s Party (CPP), was instrumental in mobilizing Ghanaians against British colonial rule, advocating for self-determination and independence. This movement marked the beginning of organized political activism in Ghana, uniting people across social and ethnic lines in the fight for liberation. Nkrumah’s call for “positive action” in 1950, which included strikes, protests, and boycotts, exemplified the power of grassroots mobilization in challenging colonial authorities. The success of these early activism efforts culminated in Ghana’s independence in 1957, making it the first Sub-Saharan African nation to gain independence from colonial rule. Nkrumah’s approach established a legacy of political activism that has influenced subsequent movements in Ghana, including those advocating for democracy and governance reforms.

B. The Evolution of Political Activism During Military and Civilian Rule

Following independence, political activism in Ghana entered a new phase, with the focus shifting from anti-colonial resistance to issues of governance and development. After Nkrumah was overthrown in a coup in 1966, Ghana experienced a series of military and civilian governments, which often suppressed political freedoms and stifled opposition. Military regimes, including those led by General Ignatius Acheampong and later Flight Lieutenant Jerry John Rawlings, sought to maintain control by cracking down on dissent, limiting the space for political activism. However, during the 1980s and early 1990s, Ghana witnessed a resurgence in political activism. This period was marked by the mobilization of students, labor unions, religious leaders, and intellectuals who demanded a return to democratic governance. The Movement for Freedom and Justice (MFJ) and the Committee for Joint Action (CJA), among other groups, organized protests, strikes, and public forums to pressure the military regime of Rawlings to transition to a civilian government. In 1992, these efforts culminated in the adoption of a new constitution, leading to the establishment of Ghana’s Fourth Republic – a multiparty democracy that has endured to this day.

C. Contemporary Political Activism in Democratic Ghana

Since Ghana’s transition to democracy in 1992, political activism has taken on new dimensions, focusing on a wide range of issues including human rights, social justice, environmental protection, and economic reforms. The establishment of democracy provided a more open environment for activism, enabling civil society organizations (CSOs), journalists, youth groups, and advocacy organizations to engage actively in public life. The Ghanaian constitution guarantees freedom of expression, assembly, and association, providing a legal basis for activism and protest. In recent years, political activism in Ghana has increasingly addressed issues related to transparency, corruption, and accountability. For example, the OccupyGhana movement, founded in 2014, has been vocal in demanding accountability from public officials, particularly in cases of corruption and misuse of public funds. OccupyGhana has used social media, public petitions, and court actions to hold government institutions accountable, reflecting a shift in activism from street protests to digital platforms and legal advocacy.

Youth activism has also gained momentum, with groups like #FixTheCountry and Democracy Hub, among others, calling for systemic changes to address issues such as youth unemployment, economic hardship, and inadequate public services. Using platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, these youth-led movements have been able to mobilize public opinion, reach a broad audience, and create a sense of urgency around socio-economic issues affecting Ghanaians. The rise of digital activism in Ghana represents a new form of engagement, demonstrating how technology is reshaping political participation.

Political activism in Ghana has evolved from anti-colonial resistance to a dynamic force advocating for transparency, justice, and democratic governance. This evolution has been shaped by historical, social, and political contexts, which influence the goals and challenges of activists today. Despite significant strides, political activism in Ghana faces obstacles, including selective activism, funding challenges, and state intimidation. These issues underscore the need for a strengthened civil society that remains independent, transparent, and committed to democratic ideals. Moving forward, Ghanaian activists must strive to overcome partisan biases and embrace inclusive, citizen-centered approaches that prioritize accountability and equity. Civil society’s ability to foster meaningful change will depend on its capacity to engage the public, advocate effectively, and collaborate across political and social divides. As Ghana continues its democratic journey, the role of political activism remains crucial in ensuring that the government remains accountable and that the voices of all citizens are heard and respected.

3. Understanding Selective Activism in Ghanaian Civil Society

Activism is defined as a process of advocating for change in social, political, economic or environmental aspect. Some forms of activism include, but are not limited to, community mobilization, group demonstrations, and advocacy. With the help of social networking sites more individuals are now coming out to support activist politics. But some people with a critical mind refer to a trend that has emerged today to part activism is narrow – it operates only snapshots – on the most fashionable problems, while leaving the others.

The general idea of selective activism describes the behavior of activists, campaigns, and advocacy groups which spend much time and resources promoting currently popular causes that are well represented across social networks and the mainstream media and provide almost no effort to overlook equally important issues that are not so viral right now. For instance, whereas there are activists who pick topics that are dominating social media buzz topics such as racially discriminated people, global warming activists, black lives matter and many more, such activists will not be bothered by other social issues such as global poverty, dirty air in the poorer neighborhoods, refugees issue or unable to note questionable pursuits of solutions to social vices.

In the context of this discussion, selective activism occurs when civil society groups engage in advocacy, critiques, or support based on partisan preferences rather than consistent principles of accountability and transparency. In Ghana, where politics is dominated by two main parties – the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC) – partisan biases can shape how certain CSOs operate. These biases manifest in various ways, such as intensified criticisms when opposing parties are in power, selective silence on issues when allied parties are governing, and an inconsistent approach to policy analysis and advocacy. Selective activism among CSOs can take multiple forms, from issue-specific focus that aligns with political interests to funding biases that influence their stance on certain topics. For example, a CSO that receives funding from donors with specific political preferences may be more inclined to support policies that align with those donors’ objectives, even if it means overlooking similar issues when a preferred party is in power. This type of activism diminishes the perception of civil society as an impartial entity dedicated to democratic principles.

4. Causes of Selective Activism in Ghana’s Civil Society

As indicated above, civil society organizations serve as watchdogs, advocates, and educators, shaping public discourse and holding leaders accountable. However, the neutrality of some CSOs has come into question, as certain groups appear more vocal in their critiques when specific political parties are in power, while remaining relatively silent or lenient when aligned parties take office. This phenomenon, often referred to as selective activism, has raised concerns about the objectivity and integrity of Ghana's civil society. Selective activism can diminish public trust in CSOs, erode their credibility, and limit their effectiveness as impartial advocates for the public good. Several factors contribute to selective activism in Ghana’s civil society, including partisan affiliations, funding sources, and the influence of Ghana’s polarized political landscape. Partisan affiliations can shape CSOs' agendas and influence their willingness to scrutinize certain administrations. Additionally, dependence on donor funding – both local and foreign – can pressure CSOs to align their advocacy efforts with the priorities of their funders, some of whom may have political interests. The politically polarized environment further exacerbates selective activism, as civil society groups are often expected to align with one side of the political spectrum. This sets the stage for a deeper analysis of the factors that shape selective activism within Ghana’s civil society and the implications for democratic accountability.

One of the primary drivers of selective activism is the ideological alignment between certain CSOs and political parties. In Ghana, some civil society leaders and members have close ties to political elites or identify with the ideologies of specific parties. This alignment can lead to biased critiques and selective silence, as CSOs may hesitate to confront leaders or policies they politically sympathize with, even when those actions contradict their stated mission. This bias can be intentional, as certain leaders leverage CSO platforms to push political agendas, or unintentional, where partisan alignment subtly influences organizational priorities.

Funding sources can also influence the degree of partisanship in CSOs. Many CSOs in Ghana rely on foreign donors, who may have specific goals and expectations, for financial support. In some cases, these donors may support initiatives aligned with their political, social, or economic objectives, leading CSOs to tailor their focus to fit donor preferences. This dependence can lead to selective activism, where CSOs become more vocal on issues favored by donors while remaining silent on topics that could jeopardize funding. Local funding also comes with political strings attached. Some CSOs receive funding from politically affiliated organizations or individuals, which can limit their ability to operate independently. This relationship can push organizations to act favorably toward a particular party, diminishing their ability to hold all governments equally accountable.

Ghana’s political environment is highly polarized, and this partisanship affects the neutrality of public discourse, including civil society advocacy. In such a setting, civil society groups are often pressured to take sides or are perceived by the public to be politically aligned based on their critique of certain policies. This polarization exacerbates selective activism, as CSOs find it challenging to maintain a consistent stance in a climate where political affiliations shape public perception. The result is an environment where advocacy is often judged by the party in power rather than the merit of the issues addressed.

5. Impact of Selective Activism on Civil Society and Democracy

Selective activism significantly affects the credibility of CSOs. When civil society organizations are perceived as being selective in their criticism or advocacy, it damages public trust. Citizens may view CSOs not as impartial actors but as entities serving the interests of political elites. This perception can weaken the impact of CSOs’ advocacy efforts, as the public becomes skeptical of their motivations. As Gyimah-Boadi (2004) notes, the strength of civil society lies in its ability to maintain independence and credibility; without these attributes, CSOs risk becoming extensions of political machinery rather than champions of democratic governance. It is also worth noting that the effectiveness of CSOs in holding government accountable depends on their ability to apply consistent scrutiny across all administrations. Selective activism creates accountability gaps, where certain policies, abuses, or governance issues receive less attention simply because an aligned party is in power. When CSOs selectively critique based on political interests, they enable governments to evade accountability. This not only undermines democratic governance but also reduces the deterrent effect that a vigilant civil society can have on potential abuses of power by political leaders.

Again, analyzing issues on partisan biases create divisions within civil society itself, as organizations become fragmented along political lines. This fragmentation can weaken the ability of CSOs to form coalitions, coordinate on advocacy campaigns, or present a unified stance on key issues. Divisions within civil society further contribute to the political polarization in Ghana, as CSOs are perceived not as a collective voice for the people but as competing factions aligned with opposing political interests. This internal division dilutes the overall impact of civil society on policymaking and governance.

6. Addressing Selective Activism: Pathways to Strengthening Non-Partisanship in Ghana’s Civil Society

To address selective activism, Ghanaian CSOs must work towards reinforcing their commitment to non-partisanship. This includes implementing self-regulation frameworks that emphasize neutrality and transparency in advocacy activities. To begin with, CSOs can adopt codes of conduct and ethical standards that mandate non-partisan advocacy, ensuring that they apply consistent criteria for accountability across administrations. By establishing guidelines on impartiality and ethical conduct, CSOs can better safeguard against political bias. Transparent disclosure of funding sources and governance structures can also help improve public trust and prevent perceptions of undue political influence. To reduce dependence on politically influenced funding, CSOs should work to diversify their funding sources by exploring both local and international grants, crowd funding, and partnerships with non-partisan private foundations. When CSOs decrease reliance on any single source of funding, they can minimize pressure to align with specific political agendas, allowing them to focus on their mission without external influence.

CSOs in Ghana can also build coalitions and networks across the political spectrum to strengthen non-partisanship. CSOs can foster a culture of collaboration that transcends political affiliations by working with organizations that have diverse perspectives and backgrounds. Collective action and coalition-building enable CSOs to address common governance issues more effectively and ensure that they remain focused on national interests rather than party politics. Concomitantly, increasing public awareness of the role of civil society in democracy is also essential for combatting selective activism. CSOs can run educational campaigns to help citizens understand the importance of non-partisan advocacy and the negative effects of politically motivated activism. Engaging the public in discussions on neutrality and transparency helps build support for a civil society that is dedicated to promoting accountability and democratic governance without political bias.

Conclusion

While Ghana’s civil society has contributed significantly to democratic governance, the issue of selective activism underscores the challenges that partisan biases pose to the effectiveness and credibility of CSOs. By selectively criticizing governments and aligning with certain political interests, CSOs risk losing public trust and undermining their role as impartial watchdogs. Addressing these challenges requires commitment to ethical standards, diversified funding, and coalition-building within civil society. Ultimately, a non-partisan, united civil society is essential for upholding democratic principles, fostering accountability, and strengthening Ghana’s democratic fabric. Only by maintaining neutrality can Ghana’s civil society effectively advocate for good governance and promote the long-term stability and prosperity of the nation.

Bibliography
Abdulai, A. G. (2009) Political context study–Ghana. Leeds and Accra: Human Rights, Power and Civic Action Research Project 12(1): 26–41.

Asamoah, K. (2020). Addressing the Problem of Political Vigilantism in Ghana through the Conceptual Lens of Wicked Problems. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 55(3), 457-471.

Asamoah, O. Y. (2014) The Political History of Ghana (1950–2013): The Experience of a Non-Conformist. Accra: Author House.

Asante, L. A., & Aikins, E. (2021). The Rise of Digital Activism: Youth and Political Engagement in Ghana’s #FixTheCountry Movement. Journal of African Media Studies.

Ayee, J. R. A. (2019). The Challenges Facing Civil Society in Africa. African Governance and Development Journal, 4(1), 29-45.

Bob-Milliar, G. M. (2014) Party youth activists and low-intensity electoral violence in Ghana: A qualitative study of party foot soldiers’ activism. African Studies Quarterly 15(1): 125–152.

Botwe-Asamoah, K. (2005). Kwame Nkrumah's Politico-Cultural Thought and Policies: An African-Centered Paradigm for the Second Phase of the African Revolution. Routledge.

Boye-Doe, J. (2016). OccupyGhana and the Politics of Accountability: Ghanaian Activism in the Digital Age. African Studies Quarterly.

Gyampo, R. E. V., & Obeng-Odoom, F. (2013). Youth Participation in Politics in Ghana: The Case of the Fourth Republic. Journal of African Studies and Development, 5(5), 129-136.

Gyimah-Boadi, E. (2004). “Civil Society and Democratic Development,” in Gyimah-Boadi, E. (Ed.), Democratic Reform in Africa: The Quality of Progress. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers. Pp. 99–118.

Gyimah-Boadi, E. (2015). Civil Society Organizations and Ghanaian Democracy: A Role of the Watchdog. Democracy and Society in Africa.

Owusu Kyei, J. R. K., & Berckmoes, L. H. (2020). Political Vigilante Groups in Ghana: Violence or Democracy? Africa Spectrum, 55(3), 321-338.