Did the NPP Fail Ghana, or Did Ghana Simply Give Mahama a Second Chance?

Someone recently asked me a question that deserves an answer beyond the familiar partisan shouting that has come to define Ghana's political discourse.

The question was simple: Did Nana Akufo-Addo and Dr Mahamudu Bawumia really fail Ghana, or is the National Democratic Congress (NDC) simply very good at political propaganda? And what exactly is John Mahama's magic that has made many Ghanaians who rejected him in 2016 embrace him again in 2024? I found the question particularly interesting because it came from an NPP supporter who said he valued my articles because I tried to remain objective. That places an obligation on me. If we are genuinely interested in educating the public, we cannot become propagandists for either party. We must interrogate the facts, acknowledge failures wherever they occurred, recognize achievements wherever they occurred, and resist the temptation to rewrite history to suit today's political argument. The truth is considerably more complicated than either the NDC or NPP would have us believe.

Did Akufo-Addo and Bawumia fail Ghana?

The short answer is: yes, in important respects --- but that answer requires qualification. Ghana's economic crisis under the Akufo-Addo administration was real. It was not an invention of the NDC. By 2022, Ghana had lost access to international capital markets, inflation had risen above 50%, the country had defaulted on much of its external debt, and government was forced to seek a new IMF programme. The IMF has documented the deterioration in Ghana's debt position. Public debt, which stood at about 63% of GDP in 2019, rose dramatically in the following years. The COVID-19 pandemic, the Russia-Ukraine war, higher international interest rates and other external shocks undoubtedly contributed to the deterioration. But those shocks did not occur in a vacuum. Ghana entered the crisis with significant fiscal and debt vulnerabilities. That distinction is important.

It is therefore unfair for the NPP to suggest that COVID-19 and the Ukraine war alone explain the crisis. But it is equally unfair for the NDC to suggest that everything that happened was created by Akufo-Addo and Bawumia. Ghana's economic problems predated both men.

The NPP did not inherit a healthy economy. This is where political memory becomes selective. When Akufo-Addo took office in January 2017, Ghana was already facing serious fiscal difficulties. The country had entered an IMF programme in 2015. The IMF reported that Ghana's fiscal deficit had reached 10.2% of GDP in 2014 and was still projected at 7.3% in 2015. The country was dealing with high debt, arrears, revenue weaknesses and macroeconomic instability. By 2016, the fiscal position remained problematic. Therefore, the popular NDC argument that Akufo-Addo inherited a perfectly healthy economy and proceeded to destroy it is not supported by the historical record.

But there is another equally important point. An incoming government cannot spend eight years blaming its predecessor for every problem it encounters. At some point, responsibility becomes its own. And by the time Ghana reached the debt crisis of 2022, Akufo-Addo's government had been in office for five years. That is long enough to own a substantial part of the outcome.

Where the NPP Genuinely Failed
The greatest weakness of the Akufo-Addo/Bawumia administration was not that it encountered economic shocks. Every government encounters shocks. The problem was that Ghana's fiscal buffers became dangerously thin before and during those shocks. Government borrowing expanded substantially. Debt accumulated. The financial-sector clean-up imposed enormous costs. Energy-sector liabilities remained a problem. Revenue mobilization did not keep pace with expenditure pressures. And then came COVID-19. The pandemic was devastating everywhere. But countries that entered the pandemic with stronger fiscal positions had greater room to manoeuvre. Ghana did not have that luxury. The consequence was painful: debt distress, restructuring, an IMF programme and severe hardship for ordinary citizens. This is where the NPP must accept responsibility.

It is also where Bawumia's political problem became particularly acute. For years, he had been presented as the economic brain of the administration. When the economy performed relatively well in the early years, that reputation worked in his favour. But when the economy collapsed into crisis, the same reputation became a liability. The electorate naturally asked: If this was the economic management team, where was the economic management?

Was Everything Under the NPP a Failure?

Certainly not. That would be another form of propaganda. The early years of the Akufo-Addo government saw relatively strong economic growth and declining inflation. The administration implemented major policies in digitalization and expanded access to secondary education through Free SHS. There were major infrastructure investments. The banking-sector clean-up, although enormously expensive, was undertaken to deal with serious insolvency problems that had accumulated in the financial system. These achievements cannot simply be erased because the government eventually lost power.

A fair assessment therefore has to say two things at once: The Akufo-Addo/Bawumia government achieved important things, but its ultimate economic failure was sufficiently severe to overshadow many of those achievements in the minds of voters. That is the uncomfortable truth.

The John Mahama Paradox
Here we arrive at the most fascinating part of the story. John Mahama was rejected by Ghanaian voters in 2016. He lost again in 2020. Yet eight years later, he returned to the presidency with a remarkable victory. Why? Is Mahama suddenly a better economic manager than he was in 2016? Not necessarily. The answer lies partly in something political scientists have long recognized. Voters often judge governments comparatively rather than absolutely. In 2016, Mahama was compared with the alternative offered by Akufo-Addo. In 2024, Mahama was compared with the government that had governed Ghana for eight years. That is a completely different comparison.

Mahama did not need to convince voters that he had been perfect. He needed to convince them that he deserved another opportunity. And the NPP's performance made that argument much easier. The man rejected in 2016 became the man of hope in 2024. This is Mahama's real political magic. It is not necessarily economic genius. It is contrast. The man who was blamed for dumsor, economic difficulties and poor governance in 2016 was now being compared with a government presiding over a debt crisis, extraordinary inflation and severe cost-of-living pressures.

Time also softened the memory of his mistakes. This is one of the most powerful forces in politics. A voter who was angry with Mahama in 2016 may not have forgotten his mistakes. But after experiencing another eight years of government, that voter can reassess the past. The question changes from: "Was Mahama good?" to: "Was Mahama worse than what came after him?" That is a completely different question. And in 2024, millions of Ghanaians effectively answered: No.

Mahama won 56.55% of the vote, according to the Electoral Commission's declared provisional results, while Bawumia conceded defeat. Reuters reported that the economic and cost-of-living crisis was a major factor in the electorate's desire for change. Mahama's other advantage: empathy. There is another dimension that should not be underestimated. Bawumia was marketed principally as a technocrat and economist. Mahama increasingly presented himself as a politician who understood the frustrations of ordinary Ghanaians. That distinction became politically important when economic hardship intensified.

People do not live inside GDP figures. They live inside food prices. They pay school fees. They buy fuel. They pay electricity bills. They look for jobs. They buy medicine. A government may point to economic growth, digitalization or improved fiscal indicators, but the citizen asks a much simpler question: "Has my life become better?" When the answer is no, sophisticated economic explanations can sound like excuses.

The NDC must not Rewrite History
This is where objectivity demands that we challenge the NDC as well. Mahama is not the innocent victim of history that some of his supporters now portray him to be. His first presidency ended with serious economic difficulties. Ghana entered an IMF programme in 2015. Fiscal deficits were high. Debt had risen significantly. Inflation was high. Power shortages damaged public confidence. His government also faced accusations of corruption and governance failures. Therefore, the claim that Mahama was simply removed from office by an ungrateful electorate despite having delivered an economic miracle is not credible. The same facts that should make the NPP accept responsibility for its failures should make the NDC acknowledge Mahama's.

So, is Mahama Now Fixing the Economy?
This question requires patience. There are encouraging signs of economic stabilization under the current administration, and Ghana's IMF-supported programme has continued. The IMF reported substantial progress during its reviews, while debt restructuring and fiscal consolidation have helped restore macroeconomic stability.

But we must be careful. Stabilization is not the same as transformation. Inflation falling does not mean prices have returned to where they were. A slower rate of price increases is not the same thing as cheaper goods. A stronger currency does not automatically mean higher household incomes. Lower deficits do not automatically mean prosperity. And debt restructuring does not erase the debt. Mahama therefore deserves neither automatic condemnation nor automatic praise. He should be judged by what his government actually accomplishes.

The Real Question: What has Changed Structurally?

This is where Ghanaian political debate often fails. We celebrate one government when indicators improve and condemn another when they deteriorate. But we rarely ask the deeper question: Why does Ghana repeatedly return to the same economic crisis? The pattern is familiar. A government inherits fiscal problems. It promises transformation. It expands programmes. It borrows. Revenues disappoint. Expenditure rises. An election approaches. Fiscal pressures intensify. Debt increases. The currency comes under pressure. Inflation rises. Ghana seeks IMF assistance. Austerity follows. Debt is restructured. The economy stabilizes. Then the cycle begins again.

If Mahama does not break that cycle, Ghana will eventually find itself back where it started, regardless of whether the government is NDC or NPP. The Ghanaian voter deserves better than partisan economics. This is why I believe political education is more important than political propaganda. The public must learn to ask both parties difficult questions.

To the NPP:

1. What decisions contributed to the debt crisis, and who takes responsibility?
2. Why did fiscal discipline deteriorate so badly?
3. Why did a government that promised exceptional economic management end up seeking an IMF bailout and restructuring its debts?

But we must also ask the NDC:

1. What caused the fiscal problems that existed when Mahama left office in 2016?
2. What is Mahama doing differently this time?
3. How will the government prevent another debt crisis?
4. Where is the money financing his promises coming from?
5. Will today's stabilization translate into jobs, productivity, higher incomes and better living standards?
6. And perhaps the most important question of all: What institutional reforms will prevent the next government from repeating the mistakes of the previous one?

The Verdict
So,

1. Was Nana Akufo-Addo's government a failure? In economic management, particularly in the years culminating in the 2022 crisis, there is sufficient evidence to say that it failed in significant respects.
2. But was everything that went wrong its creation? No.
3. Did Mahama inherit a healthy economy when he became president in 2012? No.
4. Did Mahama leave behind a healthy economy when he lost power in 2016? No.
5. Is John Mahama an economic magician? That remains to be demonstrated.
6. Then what explains his extraordinary political comeback? Perhaps it is not magic at all. Perhaps it is the oldest principle in democratic politics: A government is judged not only by what it inherited, but by what it does with what it inherited. And an opposition politician is often judged not by his past alone, but by the performance of the government seeking to replace him. Mahama's greatest political achievement may therefore not be that he convinced Ghanaians that he was perfect. He convinced them that he deserved another chance. The NPP, ironically, helped him make that case.

And this should be the lesson for both parties. Never become so convinced of your own propaganda that you stop listening to the suffering citizen. Because elections are eventually decided not in party headquarters, not on television, not on social media and not in the speeches of politicians. They are decided in the home of the pensioner who cannot afford medicine. In the kitchen of the mother who cannot afford food. In the workshop of the artisan without customers. In the room of the graduate without a job. And in the mind of the voter who quietly asks: "Am I better off than I was before?"

That question has brought governments down before. It will do so again. And if Ghana is serious about escaping its endless cycle of economic crises, the public must stop asking merely "Which party is better?" The more important question should be: "Which policies, institutions and leaders can finally make Ghana's economy work for the ordinary Ghanaian --- and how do we hold them accountable when they fail?" That is the conversation Ghana needs. Not NDC propaganda. Not NPP propaganda. Truth. And nothing but Truth.

FUSEINI ABDULAI BRAIMAH
+233208282575 / +233550558008
[email protected]