Story By: Alexander Kukah
The leadership and governance style of President John Dramani Mahama appears to be re-echoing a phrase associated with the late former President Jerry John Rawlings during the PNDC and NDC era: “Appointed by radio and sacked by radio.”
Under President Mahama’s administration, the political landscape appears to be witnessing a new wave of leadership, stewardship and accountability across the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary.
The emerging reality is that public office is increasingly being subjected to scrutiny, with appointments carrying corresponding expectations of performance and accountability.
Recent developments, including the removal of the former Chief Justice, Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, and the growing scrutiny of political and public office holders, have brought the issue of stewardship firmly into the national conversation.
I recall the President’s spokesperson and Minister for Government Communications, Felix Kwakye Ofosu, indicating that government had prepared the necessary dockets and that the Attorney-General would act strategically, ensuring that cases were properly briefed before prosecution commenced.
That position raises an important question: What does political stewardship really mean under the Mahama administration?
As the government moves into its second year, another significant development has emerged: the dissolution of boards of several state-owned enterprises and institutions.
What exactly is happening in the political kitchen? And what is the smell coming from these institutions that has prompted the government to take such decisive action?
Government-appointed board members of state-owned enterprises have a critical responsibility to safeguard public assets and ensure that the institutions they oversee deliver value to the Ghanaian people.
They are not merely expected to attend board meetings. Their responsibilities include providing strategic direction, strengthening corporate governance, overseeing financial performance, managing risks and ensuring compliance with the law.
More importantly, they are stewards of public resources.
This is where political accountability becomes critical.
Government-appointed board members operate within a political environment, but political accountability must not be confused with political interference. While boards are expected to support legitimate government policies and the statutory mandates of their institutions, they must also exercise independent and sound judgement.
Good stewardship requires board members to ask difficult questions, challenge management when necessary and ensure that major decisions are supported by evidence, financial prudence and the public interest.
The principle should be simple: government-appointed does not mean politically controlled. It means being entrusted with public resources and being prepared to account for how those resources are managed.
Nine Boards Dissolved
The latest decision by President John Dramani Mahama has brought the issue into sharper focus.
The President has dissolved the boards of nine state institutions with immediate effect.
The affected institutions are Prestea Sankofa Gold Limited, Bulk Oil Storage and Transportation Company Limited (BOST), Volta Aluminium Company Limited (VALCO), Consolidated Bank Ghana Limited (CBG), Ghana Post Company Limited, the Road Maintenance Trust Fund, TDC Ghana Limited, the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC), and the National Sports Authority.
A statement signed by the Minister for Government Communications and Spokesperson to the President, Felix Kwakye Ofosu, said the relevant sector ministers had been directed to take all necessary steps, in accordance with applicable laws and governing instruments, to give effect to the dissolution of the boards.
The statement also indicated that the affected boards would be reconstituted in due course.
The dissolution took immediate effect.
Felix Ofosu Kwakye, Come Again?
Felix Ofosu Kwakye, come again?
The development raises serious questions about the performance and stewardship of state institutions under successive governments of the Fourth Republic.
From the administrations of Jerry John Rawlings, John Agyekum Kufuor and Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, Ghanaians have repeatedly raised concerns about the performance of some state-owned enterprises, the use of taxpayers’ money and the effectiveness of boards appointed to oversee these institutions.
If public institutions are failing to deliver value despite the resources invested in them, then the issue cannot simply be about appointing new boards. It must also be about why previous boards failed, who was responsible for the failures, and what mechanisms exist to prevent the same problems from recurring.
The dissolution of nine boards is therefore more than an administrative exercise. It should become an opportunity for government to explain to the Ghanaian taxpayer what informed the decision.
Was it poor performance? Governance failures? Financial concerns? Political considerations? Or a broader restructuring of the state’s approach to managing public institutions?
Ghanaians deserve to know.
Accountability Must Go Beyond the Boards
The President’s decision also presents an opportunity to broaden the conversation about political stewardship.
Accountability should not end with boards of state-owned enterprises.
Chief executives, ministers, metropolitan, municipal and district chief executives, directors and other public officials must equally be prepared to account for their performance.
Felix, kindly alert us: How is government preparing to close the last quarter of the year?
The grassroots are watching.
They are ready to provide their own assessment of the performance of some CEOs, MMDCEs and ministers. Their assessment may not always come through official reports, boardroom presentations or government briefings. It comes from the everyday experiences of ordinary Ghanaians.
If political stewardship is ultimately about accountability, then the voices of the grassroots must form part of the conversation.
The Mahama administration has an opportunity to demonstrate that the dissolution of boards is not simply another political cycle of “appoint and sack.”
It must be about performance.
It must be about value for money.
It must be about protecting public assets.
And above all, it must be about restoring public confidence that those entrusted with the management of Ghana’s resources are genuinely acting as stewards of the people.
The question is no longer simply who has been appointed.
The bigger question is: Who is delivering—and who is accountable?
