A Political Sedative: The Illusion of Political Accountability in Ghanaian Governance

Since Kuffour's administration, every new government has entered office on a wave of promises to retrieve the nation's wealth stolen by the previous administrations and hold them accountable. These pledges, however, have consistently proven to be more political sedatives than genuine commitments—calculated maneuvers to calm the nerves of angry voters rather than sincere attempts to address corruption. From President Kuffour's token prosecution of Mallam Yussif Issah to President Mills' unfulfilled accountability rhetoric and the Akuffo-Addo government's symbolic creation of a Special Prosecutor's Office that it failed to empower, the cycle of empty promises has persisted unabated.

Now, as the Mahama administration prepares to re-enter office with its pledge of Operation Retrieve All Loot (ORAL), it is evident that this promise, like those before it, is likely more performance than substance. The glaring absence of fundamental measures, such as mandating asset declarations for appointees, signals a lack of genuine resolve. This predictable charade, designed to appease voter frustration, raises critical questions about the integrity and sincerity of political leadership in Ghana.

Promises as Political Sedatives

The recurring pattern of accountability pledges in Ghanaian politics is not coincidental. They are pre-election tactics carefully crafted to pacify an electorate fatigued by corruption and economic mismanagement. These promises function as a political sedative, offering short-term relief to voter dissatisfaction without addressing the systemic issues. Politicians understand that the promise of justice resonates deeply with an angry populace, even when there is no intention of delivering on such promises.

Lack of Political Will

Underlying this pattern is the lack of political will to pursue meaningful accountability. Politicians themselves are often complicit, fearful of establishing precedents that might come back to haunt them when they leave office. The culture of political retribution—where today's accuser may become tomorrow's accused—creates a mutually protective environment. This tacit agreement across party lines ensures that promises of accountability remain rhetorical flourishes rather than actionable plans.

Undermining Accountability Institutions

A critical enabler of this charade is the systematic weakening of institutions designed to hold governments accountable. Offices such as the Special Prosecutor, CHRAJ, and EOCO are underfunded, politicized, or outright ignored. Successive governments deliberately cripple these institutions, rendering them ineffective while simultaneously creating new, redundant outfits as a smokescreen to mask their lack of genuine commitment. This deliberate strategy perpetuates the illusion of accountability while ensuring no real progress is made.

Duplicating Efforts Instead of Empowering Institutions

The incoming Mahama government's plan to establish new structures for accountability, rather than strengthening existing ones, exemplifies this duplicative approach. Why create new bodies when institutions like the Special Prosecutor's Office already exist? Such redundancy not only wastes resources but also signals a lack of seriousness. Fundamental actions like mandating asset declarations for appointees—a cornerstone of transparency—are conspicuously absent from the government's agenda, further exposing the superficiality of its accountability promises.

Public Apathy and Short Attention Spans

Ghanaians' apathy and short political attention spans also contribute to the cycle of unfulfilled promises. While the public initially enthusiastically responds to calls for accountability, this energy quickly dissipates as media coverage wanes and new political issues emerge. Politicians exploit this predictable decline in public pressure, quietly abandoning their promises once the electorate's focus shifts.

Complicity and Political Expediency

Complicity across political parties is another factor that undermines accountability efforts. Because politicians are aware of their vulnerabilities, they often strike informal agreements to protect one another. This bipartisan protection racket ensures that accountability measures remain superficial at best. Traditional rulers, clergy, and other influential groups further complicate the situation by pressuring governments to soften or abandon investigations, shielding corrupt individuals from justice.

Accountability Without Transparency

If the incoming Mahama administration truly seeks to break this cycle, it must begin with transparency. Mandating asset declarations for all appointees would show that the government is committed to leading by example. However, the absence of this fundamental measure and the duplication of accountability efforts suggest that ORAL is yet another political sedative rather than a genuine antidote to corruption.

Legal and Bureaucratic Hurdles

Even when accountability measures are initiated, they are often bogged down by legal and bureaucratic obstacles. Prolonged investigations, lack of cooperation from key stakeholders, and endless court cases ensure that any meaningful progress is stymied. These hurdles, coupled with public apathy and short attention spans, allow politicians to abandon their accountability promises without significant backlash quietly.

Conclusion

Ghana's incoming governments' promises of accountability have long served as political sedatives—temporary ploys to appease an angry electorate without delivering meaningful results. The Mahama administration's Operation Retrieve All Loot follows this well-worn script. These promises are destined to fail without political will, empowered institutions, or a commitment to transparency. Ghanaians must demand more than rhetoric; they must insist on actionable steps like mandatory asset declarations and institutional strengthening. Otherwise, the empty promises will continue, leaving voters disillusioned and corruption unchecked.