Winner Takes All: The Achilles' Heel of Ghanaian Politics

On December 7, 2024, Ghanaians will be marching to the polls yet again to exercise their democratic right in the ninth election in Ghana’s fourth republican constitutional democratic dispensation. Despite being touted as a beacon of democracy in Africa and for that matter West African Sub-Region, a troubling paradox persist; while the nation celebrates peaceful transitions of power and multiparty democracy, its development and national cohesion are often undermined by the "winner takes all" syndrome. This system, entrenched in the political culture, has created a cycle of division and dysfunction, leaving state institutions overly politicized and the nation highly polarized.

The "Winner Takes All" Mentality
At the heart of Ghana's political landscape lies a zero-sum game where electoral triumph grants the ruling party near-absolute control over state resources and institutions. From top bureaucratic appointments to local government structures and development projects, everything is often tied to partisan loyalty. This governance philosophy breeds nepotism, cronyism and exclusion, as political opponents and their supporters are sidelined, creating a culture of “us versus them.”

When power changes hands from one political party to another, the pendulum swings, and the cycle continues. Civil servants and technocrats, who should be neutral professionals driving the national development agenda, are often replaced or marginalized for their perceived political affiliations. This undermines institutional memory and efficiency, leaving development initiatives at the mercy of electoral cycles.

Over-Politicization of State Institutions

In Ghana, institutions that should be bulwarks of impartiality — such as the Electoral Commission, security agencies such as the army and the police service, and state-owned media houses — often find themselves embroiled in accusations of bias. This erosion of neutrality undermines public trust, as these institutions are often regarded as tools for the ruling party rather than protectors of the rule of law and public good.

Moreover, the judiciary, too, has not been immune to this lingering perception. A system that thrives on public confidence faces existential threats when adjudications are interpreted through a partisan lens. This over-politicization creates a chilling effect, eroding accountability and fostering cynicism among the citizenry.

The Cost to Development and National Unity

It is worth mentioning that the consequences of this political dynamic are far-reaching. First, the "winner takes all" approach stifles collaboration and breeds inefficiency. Development projects initiated by one administration are often abandoned by the next, wasting public funds and slowing progress.

Second, this approach deepens regional and ethnic divisions. When the ruling party favors areas where it has political strongholds, it fosters resentment among marginalized regions. This imbalance undermines national unity and creates pockets of discontent that can threaten peace.

Lastly, the politicization of state institutions diminishes Ghana’s democratic gains. A democracy thrives when its institutions are strong, independent, and trusted. When political expediency supersedes meritocracy, the result is institutional decay.

The Path Forward
The "winner takes all" phenomenon is not an inevitable feature of Ghanaian politics; it is a choice. Reforms can shift the paradigm toward inclusivity and development-focused governance. Here are key steps to consider:

1. Decentralize Power: Strengthen local governance structures by granting real autonomy to local assemblies. This will empower communities to take charge of their development needs, irrespective of the ruling party.
2. Institutional Independence: Shield institutions such as the judiciary, security services, and civil service from political interference through transparent appointment processes and tenure security.
3. Promote Power-Sharing: Political leaders should commit to inclusive governance by involving opposition parties and civil society in policymaking and state appointments.
4. Civic Education: Ghanaians must demand accountability and impartiality from their leaders and institutions. A politically informed citizenry is less likely to tolerate excesses.
5. Legislate Reforms: Enact laws to limit the appointment powers of the executive arm of government, ensuring that merit, rather than political affiliation, determines who gets appointed to key roles.

Conclusion
Mother Ghana stands at a crossroads. She can continue down the path of polarization, where politics remains a winner-takes-all affair, or she can embrace reforms that prioritize national unity and a common development agenda over partisan gains. The latter path is arduous but necessary for a stable, prosperous, and united Ghana. It is time for our leaders, institutions, and citizens to rise above petty partisan politics and put the nation first. Only then can Ghana fulfill its promise as a beacon of democracy and development in Africa.

By: Bashiru Mohammed (MPH, PMP)
Research Assistant, Guttmacher Institute
New York, USA.