According to graphiconline report, the head of the Political Science Department of the University of Ghana, Legon, Professor Seidu Alidu has called for the enactment of laws that will prevent youth groups from attacking public institutions after a change in government.He said such laws must be punitive enough to deter people from taking the law into their own hands.He said although that practice had persisted since the start of the Fourth Republic, “it is not good for our democracy.”
It would be recalled that since the National Democratic Congress (NDC) won the December 7, 2024 elections, some sympathisers of the party have attacked some government institutions such as the National Disaster Management Organisation (NADMO), the Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority and the National Health Insurance Authority among other institutions.
This is not new, in 2017 irate youth aligned with the New Patriotic Party (NPP) similarly stormed state agencies, claiming to avenge perceived mistreatment under the NDC-led government. Ghana’s democratic journey has been lauded as a beacon of hope in Africa, marked by peaceful elections and transitions of power. However, the recurring attacks on public institutions following changes in government remain a troubling blot on our democratic credentials.
The call by Professor Seidu Alidufor punitive laws to curb these practices is timely and necessary. Post-election violence, where youth groups attack state institutions and personnel has become a disturbing trend since the Fourth Republic.
These actions tarnish Ghana’s democratic image and the absence of punitive laws specifically addressing post-election hostilities has emboldened these acts. Laws targeting politically motivated violence should hold perpetrators and instigators accountable, irrespective of their political affiliations. The penalties must be severe enough to serve as an effective deterrent while ensuring fairness in their enforcement to avoid politicization.
Countries with robust democratic systems maintain strong legal frameworks to prevent violence and promote accountability. Ghana must emulate these examples to protect its institutions and ensure that the rule of law prevails over mob rule. Governments mustavoid infiltratingstate institutions and the civil service with political hirelings, because when a new government takes over the reign of power the people on the other side of the political divide will want to have their pound of flesh.
Security agencies must also rise to the occasion. The provision of adequate protection for public institutions, personnel, and property during transitions of power is crucial. Security forces should remain impartial, acting swiftly to prevent and respond to acts of violence while maintaining the highest standards of professionalism.
Beyond punitive measures, addressing the root causes of post-election violence is critical. Ghana’s deeply entrenched winner-takes-all political system fuels a perception of exclusion and marginalisation among the losing party’s supporters. This frustration often manifests in violent reprisals.
Political parties and their leadership bear a significant responsibility in curbing post-election violence. Leaders must unequivocally condemn such acts and discourage their supporters from engaging in violence. Silence or tacit approval only emboldens perpetrators and perpetuates the cycle of retribution.
The government, civil society, security agencies and citizens must work together to establish a zero-tolerance policy for post-election violence. By doing so, Ghana can reaffirm its status as a democratic leader in Africa, setting a standard for peaceful transitions of power and the protection of public institutions.
