In Ghana’s ever-contentious political landscape, the latest controversy over alleged sole-sourcing in the government’s “Big Push” infrastructure contracts has once again ignited fierce debate. The opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP) has been quick to mount pressure on the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC), accusing it of breaching procurement regulations and undermining transparency.
Yet, beneath the noise of press conferences and political rhetoric lies a deeper and more uncomfortable truth: Ghana’s public procurement challenges are not the creation of any one political party. They are systemic, longstanding, and crucially have persisted under both NPP and NDC administrations.
The governing legal framework, the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663), as amended by the Public Procurement (Amendment) Act, 2016 (Act 914), was designed to ensure fairness, competitiveness, and value for money in public contracting.
However, evidence from audits, policy reviews, and procurement assessments over the years points to a consistent pattern of weak compliance, political interference, and limited enforcement—regardless of which party occupies the Jubilee House.
It is against this backdrop that the NPP’s recent posture must be examined. On what moral grounds does the party seek to hold the NDC to account for alleged sole-sourcing practices when its own time in office was not without controversy in the same domain? Ghanaians vividly recall numerous procurement-related concerns raised during the NPP’s tenure—ranging from questions about inflated contracts to the frequent use of sole-sourcing under justifications that were, at times, heavily contested.
This is not to suggest that the NDC should be absolved of scrutiny. Far from it. Public accountability demands that every allegation of procurement breaches be thoroughly investigated and, where necessary, sanctioned. The integrity of Ghana’s procurement system depends on consistent enforcement, not selective outrage.
However, what is troubling is the pattern of political amnesia that often accompanies transitions of power. Parties that preside over governance challenges while in office frequently re-emerge in opposition as vocal critics, projecting an image of reformist purity that contrasts sharply with their own record. This cycle undermines public trust and reduces serious governance issues to mere tools of political point-scoring.
The Ghanaian electorate is not oblivious. Citizens remember the economic and administrative difficulties experienced over the past eight years under the NPP, just as they remain alert to the performance of the current administration. It is therefore unsurprising that many view the party’s recent press engagements on the “Big Push” contracts as disproportionate, if not disingenuous.
If Ghana is to make meaningful progress in strengthening its procurement regime, the conversation must shift from partisan accusation to institutional reform. Both major political parties must acknowledge their shared shortcomings and commit to enforcing procurement laws without fear or favour. This includes empowering oversight bodies, ensuring transparency in contract awards, and, most importantly, holding offenders accountable irrespective of political affiliation.
In conclusion, the issue at stake is not which party can shout the loudest, but which can demonstrate a genuine commitment to upholding the law. Until that standard is met consistently, public declarations of outrage, no matter how forceful, will continue to ring hollow. Because the NPP are not saints and angels.
The Trial News.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!