Has the NPP Learnt the Right Lessons From Its 2024 Defeat?

I have followed the New Patriotic Party (NPP) for many years, and I have always believed that political parties, like human beings, must be capable of examining themselves honestly after failure. That is why I find the latest developments in the NPP both interesting and troubling. The party has elected a new national leadership. John Boadu is the new National Chairman. Justin Frimpong Kodua has retained the position of General Secretary. Kojo Fosu Boadu, Henry Nana Boakye, and Nana Akomea are the new Vice Chairpersons. Titus-Glover is National Organizer, Mavis Hawa Koomson is Women's Organizer, Abagna Fuseini is Youth Organizer and Alfred Kojo Thompson is Treasurer. They have all been legitimately elected and deserve the opportunity to prove themselves. But elections within political parties do not end the discussion. In fact, they should begin it. The question that ought to concern every NPP member, sympathizer and supporter is simple: Has the party elected the leadership it needs to rebuild after one of its worst electoral defeats in the Fourth Republic? I do not pretend to have the answer. But I have questions.

The Leader Who Can Never Really Be Challenged?

Perhaps the most consequential decision taken at the NPP's latest conference was not the election of John Boadu or Justin Kodua. It was the constitutional amendment making the elected presidential candidate the leader of the party. The amendment provides that when the NPP has an elected presidential candidate, that candidate becomes the party leader. When the party is in government, the President remains leader until a new presidential candidate is elected. The change reverses an arrangement approved earlier in 2026 that had made the National Chairman the party leader. At first glance, this may appear logical. After all, the presidential candidate is the person who carries the party's ultimate electoral burden. But let us test the arrangement with a simple hypothetical.

Suppose I contest the NPP presidential primary against Mr. X. Mr. X defeats me and becomes the party's presidential candidate and, under the new constitution, the leader of the party. He subsequently contests the national presidential election and loses. I then decide to contest the presidential primary against him again four years later. Who starts the race with the greater institutional advantage? The answer is obvious. The defeated presidential candidate remains the party leader. He has the visibility. He has the national platform. He has the authority associated with leadership. He has access to the party's organizational machinery. He has relationships with constituency, regional and national structures. He can potentially influence the political conversation inside the party for four years before his challenger gets another opportunity to compete with him. And then we are told that both of us are going into another presidential contest as equals. Are we really equals? That is the question.

But is This Unique to Ghana?
No. And that is important. Political parties around the world have allowed defeated leaders to remain in office. Canada provides an especially interesting contemporary example. Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre lost the 2025 federal election and even lost his own parliamentary seat. Yet he remained leader and subsequently won an internal leadership review with 87.4% support. Australia has also seen party leaders survive electoral defeats. The Australian parliamentary record documents several occasions when leaders remained after disappointing election results, while in other cases leaders resigned or were replaced. So the principle itself is not absurd.

The issue is what safeguards exist against incumbency within the party becoming an unfair advantage. Canada, for example, has a formal leadership-review mechanism following an election defeat. The Conservatives' constitution requires such a review after an election in which the party fails to form government and the leader does not resign. That is the distinction I believe the NPP should think about. A party can allow a defeated presidential candidate to remain its leader. But it must also ensure that the leader does not become so institutionally entrenched that every subsequent challenger is effectively running uphill. Leadership must come with accountability.

The Boadu-Kodua Paradox
Then there is John Boadu. Mr. Boadu is not a political lightweight. He has long experience in the NPP and has served as General Secretary. But there is an interesting political paradox in his elevation to National Chairman. In 2022, John Boadu contested the General Secretary position against Justin Kodua. Kodua won. The figures are instructive: Kodua obtained 2,837 votes against Boadu's 2,524 --- a margin of 313 votes. Four years later, the man who defeated him for General Secretary is still General Secretary, while the man he defeated has now become National Chairman. There is nothing constitutionally wrong with that. Different positions require different skills.

A person may lose one position and win another. Politics is not a mathematics examination in which a failed candidate in one subject automatically fails every other subject. But the question remains: What has changed? If the argument was that John Boadu was not the best candidate for General Secretary in 2022, what qualities have emerged since then that make him the best person to supervise the broader organizational and political work of the party as National Chairman? That is not an insult to John Boadu. It is a legitimate question about political accountability. And Mr. Boadu's supporters could reasonably answer it by pointing to his experience, networks, institutional knowledge and political maturity. If that is the argument, let them make it. The NPP should not be afraid of such questions.

What Exactly is Justin Kodua Bringing Back to the Table?

The question is even more difficult for Justin Kodua. He has been retained as General Secretary with a very substantial 4,486 votes, far ahead of his closest challenger, Sylvester Tetteh, who received 1,340. That is a strong mandate. But it is also a mandate that carries a heavy burden. The General Secretary was part of the national leadership of the party during the period that culminated in the NPP's devastating 2024 defeat. The NPP went from 137 parliamentary seats in 2020 to 88 in 2024. Its presidential candidate also lost decisively. The Electoral Commission's updated figures put John Mahama at 56.42% and Mahamudu Bawumia at 41.75%. The NPP therefore did not merely lose the presidency. It lost parliamentary strength on a massive scale. It lost public confidence. And it lost the argument with millions of Ghanaian voters. The obvious question is: What did the party learn from that defeat, and what is Justin Kodua bringing to the new administration that was missing before? The answer should not simply be that he has experience. Experience matters. But experience without demonstrable correction can become repetition. If the same people who presided over the previous electoral strategy are retained, the burden is on them to demonstrate that they understand why the strategy failed and how they intend to do things differently.

The Vice Chairmanship Raises Another Question

The Vice Chairmanship results are perhaps the most fascinating of all. Kojo Fosu Boadu, popularly known as Bamba, emerged first, followed by Henry Nana Boakye and then Nana Akomea, Nana Akomea's third-place finish is particularly interesting. He is an experienced communicator and one of the NPP's more recognizable public voices. Yet he finished behind Bamba and Nana B. That is democracy. Delegates have spoken. But politics is also about symbolism. Would it not have sent a different message if the order had been reversed --- Nana Akomea first, Nana B second and Bamba third? Perhaps. I say this not because Bamba does not deserve his victory. He does. Rather, political parties sometimes communicate through the composition and ordering of their leadership. The NPP has just come out of an election in which communication, public perception and trust became major issues. The choice of those who will help articulate the party's message therefore matters enormously.

Hawa Koomson Deserves Her Opportunity
I have considerably fewer reservations about Mavis Hawa Koomson's election as Women's Organizer. She has extensive political experience. She has held ministerial office and has survived the rough and tumble of Ghanaian politics. Whether one agrees with all her political decisions or not, she is not entering the position as a political novice. She knows the party. She knows her opponents. She knows elections. She knows the grassroots. I therefore believe she deserves the opportunity to demonstrate what she can do.

The same applies to Titus-Glover. He is an astute politician with considerable political energy and a reputation for understanding the language of grassroots politics. The Organizer’s position is one of the most important offices in any political party. If Titus-Glover can translate his political instincts into disciplined organization, constituency mobilization and genuine rebuilding, he could become one of the most consequential members of the new leadership.

The NPP Has Not Run Out of Options
Despite my reservations, I would not write off the NPP. That would be a mistake. The NPP is an old political tradition with deep roots across Ghana. It has survived defeat before. It has rebuilt itself before. It returned to power in 2000 after years in opposition. It returned again in 2016 after eight years out of office. Therefore, the question is not whether the NPP can come back. It can. The question is whether the new leadership understands what kind of comeback is required.

The party cannot simply campaign against the NDC. It must convince Ghanaians that it has changed. It must explain why it lost. It must confront internal divisions. It must listen to ordinary members. It must reconnect with constituencies. And above all, it must rediscover the difference between governing for the people and governing for the party's own political class.

The NDC Should Not Celebrate Too Early

There is another side to this story. The NDC may currently appear comfortably placed. John Mahama won the 2024 election decisively. The party obtained a large parliamentary majority, while the NPP suffered a historic setback. But political parties have a peculiar problem: Winning power can be easier than deciding who succeeds the person who won it. John Mahama cannot remain president forever. At some point, the NDC will have to answer the succession question. And that is where the party could encounter the most dangerous phenomenon in African party politics: pull-him-down politics.

Today, politicians may stand together behind President Mahama. Tomorrow, some of those same politicians may begin calculating their own futures. Who should succeed him? Who has the strongest regional base? Who has the President's blessing? Who controls the grassroots? Who has the money? Who has the connections? Who is too ambitious? Who is becoming too popular? And then the knives may quietly come out. That is how governing parties can begin destroying themselves from within. The NDC therefore has a very important advantage today, but it also has a looming problem --- Succession.

Could Spio-Garbrah Change the Equation?

Take a hypothetical candidate such as Ekwow Spio-Garbrah. I use his name not as a prediction or endorsement but as an illustration. Suppose the NDC eventually chooses a candidate with experience, intellectual depth, international exposure, political maturity and the ability to appeal beyond the traditional NDC base. Such a candidate could make the NDC extremely difficult to dislodge. If the NDC manages its succession peacefully, chooses a credible candidate and maintains its electoral coalition, the party could potentially remain in power well beyond Mahama's presidency.

But there is an equally plausible alternative. The succession struggle could tear the party apart. The same people who worked together to defeat the NPP could begin working against one another. The party could become consumed by internal contests. Regional calculations could replace national considerations. Personal ambition could replace ideology. And candidates could spend more time destroying one another than presenting an alternative vision of Ghana. If that happens, the NPP would have an opening.

The Real Contest Begins Now
This is why I would caution both parties against becoming prisoners of their own victories or defeats. For the NPP, the 2028 election is not simply about marketing Bawumia. It is about rebuilding credibility. The new executives have less than two years. Two years is two weeks in politics. The NPP's new leadership must therefore answer some difficult questions.

• Why did the party lose so badly in 2024?
• Why did so many traditional supporters abandon it?
• Why did the parliamentary vote collapse in so many constituencies?
• Why did the party's message fail to resonate with younger Ghanaians?
• Why did the cost of living become such a powerful political weapon against the government?
• Why did many voters feel disconnected from the administration?
• And perhaps the most important question: What will the NPP do differently next time?

Not what will it say! What will it do differently!

And What Should the NPP's New Leader Be?

The new constitutional arrangement gives the presidential candidate enormous political significance. That makes one principle essential: The leader must be bigger than his personal ambition. If the NPP is serious about rebuilding, its leader must be able to tolerate criticism. He must allow other potential presidential candidates to organize. He must not use party structures to suffocate internal competition. He must recognize that today's rival could become tomorrow's running mate, minister, campaigner or even successor. A political party cannot become a private estate. The moment internal democracy becomes cosmetic, the party begins dying from within.

My Verdict: 2028 is Genuinely Open
So, does the new NPP leadership stand a chance in 2028? Absolutely! But not because John Boadu has become Chairman. Not because Justin Kodua has been retained. Not because Titus-Glover is Organizer. Not because Hawa Koomson is Women's Organizer. And certainly not simply because Mahama will eventually have to leave office.

The NPP has a chance because political fortunes change. But it will have to earn that chance. It must rebuild from the constituency upward. It must recruit new voters. It must stop treating criticism as betrayal. It must reward competence rather than loyalty alone. It must make room for younger politicians without discarding experienced ones. It must distinguish between party loyalty and national interest. And it must be prepared to ask uncomfortable questions about its own leadership.

The NDC, meanwhile, must understand that its greatest threat may eventually come from inside. If it manages the succession after Mahama intelligently, democratically and inclusively, it could remain in power for many years. If it allows succession politics to degenerate into factional warfare, it could hand the NPP the very opportunity it needs.

Ghana deserves better than two parties waiting for the other to destroy itself. Ultimately, this should not be about whether the NPP or NDC wins. It should be about whether Ghana wins. I am disappointed by aspects of the NPP's new leadership, but I do not want the party to fail. I would rather see the NPP rebuild itself into a stronger, more democratic and more competent opposition. And I would equally like to see the NDC govern successfully and prepare its succession responsibly. Why? Because Ghana needs political parties that compete on ideas, competence and integrity --- not parties that win because the other party has collapsed.

The NPP has to prove that the delegates made the right choices. The NDC has to prove that electoral victory can be converted into good governance and a peaceful succession. And the Ghanaian voter has to watch them both. The 2028 election may therefore not be decided by what happened at the NPP conference in Kumasi. It may ultimately be decided by something much bigger: Which party learns faster from its mistakes? That is the real contest. And it has already begun.

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