NPP, Change your Nomination Process Carefully

Oheneba

It seems that a two-stage process of selecting our party's flagbearer is in the offing and it offers many advantages but one huge risk. By this proposed system, vetted candidates can run in the first stage. Then 3 of them will be selected to contest in a second round/stage before an expanded number of delegates (in the115,000 range) will vote to choose the party's flagbearer. I pray for all those who will help fashion the final policy in two weeks to have abundant wisdom. I think everyone should also help to offer constructive ideas to help in framing the ideas of the representatives at the constitutional conference.

I think the idea of an elite group of selectors made up of the party's elected officials and party officers (including some who are out of office) must be QUASHED. It is a high risk and low rewards proposal. You see, by its predominantly Southern and Akan base of support, the NPP's elected officials are even more ethnically and tribally skewed towards Akans. For instance, of the 110 or so MPs we have in parliament, I suspect 80 or more are Akans. This elucidation is obviously not to bash the NPP but just to state the facts of where we get most of our support from. No party in Ghana can truly claim to very diverse. In our regionally/tribally polarised politics, the Out-of-Control and Deceiving NDC can be described as non-Akan-based while the NPP can be described as Akan-based.

My argument therefore is that using elected officials/officers and the like to select any candidates for the second round of the nomination can easily be manipulated by our detractors as skewed in favour of Akans, even if the resulting candidates would have otherwise been the same 3 people. Accusations of tribalism can start flying from the supporter of some ot those who do not make it to the second round or from the Out-of-Control NDC, if the three strongest candidates chosen are say all Akans.

This is why after extensive discussions with some party supporters and on the NPP Forum in the last few days, I believe that the idea of an elite group of selectors must be QUASHED. Instead, the current delegates who nominate our flagbearer can be used to select the 3 candidates for the second round of the primaries. Simply, the current system of delegates of 5000 or so have served us quite well. This system is also more representative of all the regions of our country and whoever they choose will be more acceptable than those chosen by an elite group of selectors, who are likely to be less representative of our country. There shall be no need for second rounds of voting by the delegates.

Simply, the top three candidates voted on by the delegates go into a second round of primaries, engage each other in a spirited general election-like campaign. Then the more general election-like expanded 115,000 delegates or so will meet at their constituency levels and choose our flagbearer from among the three candidates. If we had a system like this, the 115,000 would have voted on Nana, Alan K and V.P. Aliu, after these three candidates had engaged each other in a second round of primary campaigning.

Finally, I believe that as NPP Canada is advocating, the NPP adopts a process of balloting and tallying which will avoid any need for a run-off in the voting in the second round of the primaries. So, each of the 115,000 expanded delegates will have to be given a ballot to choose their first choice and then a second choice of nominee. After the ballots are contered, if no one gets 50%+ of the first choice votes, then each candidate's second choice votes shall be added on to their first choice votes, SOMEHOW (please review the next paragraphs for the SOMEHOW). Whoever gets the most first and second choice votes (as weighted or otherwise) shall become the nominee. Any ballot which has the same candidate chosen twice shall be diregarded in case the second choices are countered.

We are still debating and will appreciate any ideas from you regarding how to count such second choices. Should it be that only the top two first choice candidates get their second choice votes tallied, to choose from among the two, the nominee? Or, should it be that all three candidates first and second choices be considered? To illustrate, Candidate x, y and z received the following: 42%, 32% and 26% respectively. When the second choice votes are countered, x, y and z got the following: 23%, 28% and 50%. If the first and second choices are not weighted but added on, candidate z will be the nominee. If only the top two first choice candidates are considered in this scenario, candidate x will be the nominee.

A good case can be made that in fact candidate z should be nominee since he/she is least unacceptable to most members of the party. However, a fairness argument can also be made that first choice votes should weigh more than second choice votes. So, let's assume that it is decided that second choices should weigh 50% less than first choices, candidates x, y and z will now have the following percentages from the second choices: 11.5%, 14% and 25%. In this scenario candidate x will be the nominee, over candidate y and z, if he/she is considere.

I think I like weighted approach best. because it is fairer. Also, I think all three candidates should be considered for the nomination, in cases whereby no one get a One-Touch win of more than 50%+ first choice votes, irrespective of the number of first choices votes attained.

Whichever of these two approaches are adopted, however, having a second choice on the ballot will have a strategic benefit or helping to reduce acrimony. No candidate can afford to alienate the other's supporters, when they may well need their votes at least as a second choice. This can reduce disunity and/or acrimony, emanating from the primaries.

Regards,
Prince Ofosu Sefah.
[email protected].