Guarded but Exposed: The Dangerous Complacency Undermining Security at State Functions

It does not take a gunshot to expose a security failure. Sometimes, it takes a whisper, a laugh, or a distracted glance. And in those seemingly harmless moments, the safety of a nation’s highest office can quietly unravel.

I will admit it that the first time I heard the president publicly urge national security to tighten protection at state functions, it unsettled me. It was not merely the caution in his voice, it was the implication that something, somewhere, is not as secure as it should be.

When President John Mahama addressed a congregation during the chief of staff [COS] Mr. Julius Debrah’s thanksgiving service at the Pentecost Church Ghana, he referenced a disturbing international incident involving a security scare at a high-profile U.S. event. In that moment, his concern felt real, immediate, and justified. He revealed that due to such risks, he and his vice are often advised not to attend certain events together, a precaution rooted in global security best practices.

But beyond the cautionary statements lies a more troubling domestic reality, one that unfolds not in theory, but in plain sight.

At several high-profile national events, including the 27th anniversary celebration of the Asantehene, Otumfuo Osei Tutu II, there were visible lapses that should concern any serious observer. During a formal address by Sir Sam Jonah, security personnel stationed at the background tasked with vigilance were seen engaging in casual conversations. Their attention, it seemed, had drifted from duty to distraction.

This is not an isolated occurrence.
Across multiple state functions broadcast live on national television, similar patterns emerge. Security officers loiter, mingle freely with civilians, and at times appear more engaged in social interaction than in surveillance. These are not minor breaches of etiquette, they are cracks in a system that is supposed to be airtight.

Security is not merely about presence, it is about posture, discipline, and awareness. A distracted guard is not a guard, it is an illusion of protection.

Equally concerning is the conduct of some government officials themselves. At events where the president remains attentive listening, observing, even taking notes some ministers, district chief executives, and staffers appear disengaged. Heads bowed, not in reflection, but over mobile phones. Conversations unfold in hushed tones while proceedings continue. In such environments, attention the first line of situational awareness is lost.

It must be said, however, that there are exceptions worth acknowledging. The president, vice president, and chief of staff often demonstrate commendable alertness at public gatherings. Their posture reflects an understanding that leadership is not only about presence but also about perception and vigilance. The Speaker of Parliament has similarly exhibited consistency in attentiveness and composure.

Yet leadership alone cannot compensate for systemic indiscipline.

Security is a chain, and like any chain, it is only as strong as its weakest link. When officers charged with protection become casual, and when public officials fail to model awareness, the entire structure becomes vulnerable, not necessarily to visible threats, but to the unseen, the unexpected, and the unthinkable.

What is required now is not rhetoric, but reform.

First, there must be strict enforcement of professional conduct among security personnel. Officers who deviate from protocol at high-level events should face immediate corrective measures. The culture of familiarity must give way to a culture of focus.

Second, specialized drills and orientation programs should be introduced for government officials. Attendance at state functions must come with an understanding of security etiquette, where to sit, how to behave, and why attention matters.

Finally, there must be a shift in mindset. Security is not the sole responsibility of armed personnel, it is a shared duty. Every individual on the dais, every aide, every official contributes either to safety or to risk.

In an era where threats evolve rapidly and unpredictably, complacency is the most dangerous vulnerability of all. The scenes we dismiss today as harmless may tomorrow become the evidence we regret ignoring.

A nation must not wait for a crisis to correct what is already visible.

Because sometimes, the greatest danger is not the attack we fear but the negligence we tolerate.