In the aftermath of the 2024 general elections, political analysts and ordinary citizens alike were stunned by one particular statistic: nearly 40% of registered voters did not show up to vote. In a democracy where elections are tightly contested, such a large block of abstentions could shift the political tide — and, in this case, it did.
While opposition parties, especially the NDC, interpret this as a growing national rejection of the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP), a closer look tells a different story. The real cause may not be mass defection to the other side, but something more insidious: voter apathy among the NPP’s own supporters.
The Numbers Don’t Lie
In the 2024 presidential race, NDC won with a margin of just over 340,000 votes. Meanwhile, over 4 million eligible voters chose not to participate at all. In traditional NPP strongholds like Ashanti, Eastern, and parts of Greater Accra, voter turnout dropped significantly compared to 2020.
In 2020, the NPP secured around 6.7 million votes, buoyed by excitement over Free SHS and the COVID-19 management. In 2024, it lost close to a million votes, despite having the advantage of incumbency.
This drop cannot be explained by a sudden shift in ideology. Rather, it reflects a quiet revolt by the party’s own base — disappointed, disillusioned, and disinterested.
Why Did the Base Stay Home?
1. Broken Promises and Disillusionment: From unfulfilled jobs to unresponsive MPs, many NPP supporters felt used and forgotten. Grassroots organizers, party communicators, and serial callers who fought to bring the party to power were sidelined once victory was achieved. Economic hardship worsened, and explanations from government officials sounded more like lectures than solutions.
2. Elite Capture and Leadership Fatigue: The party became the domain of a few powerful families, cliques, and contractors. The same party executives who presided over the decline — from internal rifts to electoral defeats — are still in place. The recent decision to elect a flagbearer in January 2026, over a year after electoral defeat, sends the wrong signal: that the party has not learned its lessons.
3. Lack of Renewal: New Wine in Old Bottles: The party base is asking: Where is the introspection? Where is the house-cleaning? Instead of bringing in new thinkers, youthful leaders, and grassroots voices, the NPP leadership seems to be doubling down on the same tactics that led to its fall. Ghana’s youth — hungry for change and fresh faces — feel ignored by a party stuck in the past.
What Should the NPP Have Done Differently?
Immediate Post-Election Reorganization: The NPP should have called an early National Delegates Conference to replace national executives who lost touch with the base.
Rapid Flagbearer Election (2025, not 2026): Allowing a long vacuum of leadership creates further uncertainty and division, and delays mobilization toward 2028.
Re-engage the Disillusioned Base: The foot soldiers, polling station agents, and community mobilizers are the party’s spine. They feel betrayed. A serious listening tour, not just town hall lectures, is needed.
Broaden the Party’s Appeal: More than ever, the NPP must shed the Akan-only image, reach out to neglected northern and Volta constituencies, and embrace younger, diverse candidates.
Reset the Message: The party must shift from big talk about macroeconomics to practical, everyday issues: jobs, security, access to healthcare, sanitation, and opportunities for small businesses.
Conclusion: Rebuilding or Retreating?
The silence of over 4 million voters in 2024 was not a shrug — it was a statement. Many of them, especially from the NPP’s traditional fold, chose silence over betrayal. They didn’t cross over to vote NDC — they simply walked away. That is perhaps more dangerous than defeat.
If the NPP does not restructure quickly, rethink its leadership, and renew its message, 2024 may not just be a loss — it may mark the beginning of political decline. Voter apathy was not the disease; it was the symptom of a party that stopped listening.
r. Kofi Abrefa Busia went into exile in 1959 due to increasing political repression by Dr. Kwame Nkrumah’s Convention People’s Party (CPP) government and concerns for his personal safety.
What led to Dr. Busia’s exile:
1. Authoritarian Tactics by the CPP:
After Ghana became a republic in 1960, Nkrumah increasingly consolidated power, suppressing opposition. The Preventive Detention Act (1958) allowed the government to detain individuals without trial. Many opposition figures were harassed, arrested, or silenced.
2. Targeting of Opposition Leaders:
As the leader of the United Party (UP) and a vocal critic of Nkrumah’s government, Busia became a primary target. With opposition parties banned and surveillance intensified, Busia feared arrest or worse.
3. Political Persecution:
His criticism of one-party rule, socialism, and Nkrumah’s foreign alliances (especially with the Eastern Bloc) made him a threat. The political atmosphere had grown intolerant of dissent.
4. Self-preservation and Advocacy Abroad:
In 1959, Busia left Ghana under the pretext of academic and diplomatic assignments, including roles with the University of Leiden and the United Nations. He used his exile to criticize the Nkrumah regime from abroad and advocate for democracy in Ghana.
Who took his place?
With Busia in exile, S. D. Dombo (Simon Diedong Dombo) assumed de facto leadership of the United Party in Ghana. He was a respected traditional leader (chief of Duori) and former leader of the Northern People’s Party, one of the founding parties of the UP.
S. D. Dombo held the party together under intense political pressure. He maintained links with Busia and other exiled leaders. Despite limitations, Dombo symbolized the resilience of the opposition until the eventual overthrow of Nkrumah in 1966, which allowed Busia and others to return and re-enter political life.
Summary:
Busia went into exile in 1959 due to Nkrumah’s repression and threats under the Preventive Detention Act. S. D. Dombo took over leadership of the United Party in his absence and kept the opposition alive in Ghana. The United Party (UP) metamorphosed into the Popular Front Party (PFP) in 1979, during Ghana’s Third Republic.
Background and Timeline:
1. 1966 – Overthrow of Nkrumah:
After Kwame Nkrumah was overthrown by the military (the National Liberation Council or NLC) in February 1966, the ban on opposition parties was lifted. This allowed former opposition figures, including Dr. K. A. Busia, to return.
2. 1969 – Progress Party (PP):
Busia and his allies formed the Progress Party, the ideological and organizational successor to the UP. In the 1969 elections, the PP won and Busia became Prime Minister of Ghana in the Second Republic.
3. 1972 – Overthrow of Busia’s Government:
The Progress Party government was overthrown by Colonel Ignatius Kutu Acheampong in January 1972, and political activities were banned once again.
4. 1979 – Formation of the Popular Front Party (PFP):
When the ban on political parties was lifted in preparation for elections to return Ghana to civilian rule in 1979, the PFP was formed. It was composed largely of former members of the United Party and the Progress Party, maintaining the Danquah-Busia-Dombo ideological tradition of liberal democracy and market-oriented policies.
The PFP was led by Victor Owusu, a former Attorney General and Foreign Minister under Busia.
Summary:
The UP tradition continued through the Progress Party (1969), and after the 1972 coup, was revived as the Popular Front Party (PFP) in 1979.
The PFP was thus a continuation of the UP/PP tradition, rooted in the political legacy of J. B. Danquah, K. A. Busia, and S. D. Dombo.
Dr. Joseph Boakye Danquah (J. B. Danquah) was one of the most significant architects of modern Ghanaian politics. His influence spanned the colonial period, the independence struggle, and the early post-independence era. He is often regarded as a founding father of Ghana, and his ideas continue to shape political discourse in the country.
Key Roles and Contributions of J. B. Danquah:
1. Pioneer of Nationalism and the Independence Struggle
Early Advocate for Independence:
Long before Kwame Nkrumah emerged, Danquah was actively advocating for self-government. As early as the 1930s and 1940s, he was involved in the push for constitutional reforms and greater African representation in governance.
Member of the Legislative Council:
He served in the Legislative Council during the colonial era and used this platform to fight for African rights and reforms in governance.
2. Founding Member of the United Gold Coast Convention (UGCC)
In 1947, J. B. Danquah co-founded the United Gold Coast Convention (UGCC) — the first political party in the Gold Coast to demand self-government. He and other educated elites formed the UGCC to push for constitutional reforms and self-rule under British oversight. Kwame Nkrumah was invited by the UGCC to become its general secretary — a decision that would later lead to a split and the rise of Nkrumah’s Convention People’s Party (CPP).
3. Mentor to Nkrumah and Opponent of CPP Rule
Although Danquah brought Nkrumah into mainstream politics, the two soon became ideological rivals. Danquah advocated liberal democracy, rule of law, and gradual constitutional progress. Nkrumah favored socialism, mass mobilization, and a centralized state. After Nkrumah broke away from the UGCC to form the CPP in 1949, Danquah became one of the leading opposition voices.
4. Architect of the Name “Ghana”
Danquah is widely credited with proposing the name “Ghana” for the independent nation, drawing on historical links to the ancient Ghana Empire in West Africa.
5. Champion of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo Tradition
Danquah’s ideas on governance, democracy, and constitutional rule became the bedrock of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo political tradition.
This tradition emphasizes:
Multi-party democracy Individual freedom Rule of law Decentralization Market-based economy
Today, the New Patriotic Party (NPP) considers itself the ideological descendant of Danquah’s vision.
6. Persecution and Death in Detention
Under Nkrumah’s Preventive Detention Act, Danquah was arrested multiple times without trial. He died tragically in prison at Nsawam in 1965, after being detained by the CPP regime for criticizing its authoritarianism.
Summary:
Aspect Contribution
Nationalism Early leader of independence movement
UGCC Co-Founder Helped form the first political party in Gold Coast
Naming Ghana Proposed the name “Ghana”
Opposition Leadership Key rival of Nkrumah and voice for democracy
Ideological Legacy Father of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition
Martyrdom Died in detention under Nkrumah’s regime
Legacy:
Dr. J. B. Danquah is remembered as a visionary nationalist, intellectual, and advocate for constitutional democracy. His contributions are honored in modern Ghana through institutions like the J. B. Danquah Memorial Lecture Series and his ideological impact on parties like the NPP
The Popular Front Party (PFP) was the main opposition party during Ghana’s 1979 general elections, which marked the return to civilian rule after several years of military governance. The PFP was the successor to the Progress Party (PP) of Dr. K. A. Busia and continued the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition of liberal-democratic governance.
Key Figures of the PFP:
1. Victor Owusu – Presidential candidate and party leader. A lawyer and former Attorney General and Foreign Minister under Busia. Charismatic but seen by some as elitist.
2. B. J. da Rocha: National Chairman of the PFP and later the first General Secretary of the NPP. Played a strategic role in party organization.
3. Dr. J. A. Addison: Leading intellectual and policy voice within the party.
4. Dr. Kwame Safo-Adu: Prominent economist and political figure.
5. Kwaku Baah: Lawyer and outspoken member of the party.
6. S. D. Dombo: Elder statesman of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition and a moral force within the party.
Why the PFP Lost the 1979 Elections to the People’s National Party (PNP):
1. Association with the Overthrown Busia Government: The PFP, being ideologically linked to Busia’s Progress Party, suffered from the public memory of the 1972 economic crisis, devaluation, and austerity policies under Busia. Many blamed Busia’s administration for hardship, despite its democratic character.
2. Elitist Perception:
Victor Owusu, though competent, was perceived as arrogant and disconnected from the masses. His refined demeanor and elite background contrasted with the populist appeal of the PNP’s candidate, Dr. Hilla Limann.
3. PNP’s Nkrumahist Legacy:
The People’s National Party (PNP) claimed to be the ideological successor of Kwame Nkrumah’s CPP, which still had significant grassroots support, especially in rural and lower-income areas. Many Ghanaians, particularly the youth and left-leaning voters, remained loyal to Nkrumah’s memory and legacy.
4. Fragmentation of Opposition:
Other smaller parties and independent candidates also drew votes from the anti-Nkrumahist camp, weakening the PFP’s electoral strength.
5. Dr. Hilla Limann’s Humble Appeal:
Limann, though relatively unknown, came across as humble, pan-Africanist, and moderate.
His campaign benefited from a cleaner slate and the emotional appeal of the Nkrumah tradition.
Summary:
Factor PFP Disadvantage
Historical association Linked to unpopular Busia-era policies Public image Perceived elitism of Victor Owusu Ideological appeal Nkrumahist nostalgia favored PNP Electoral strategy Opposition vote split Leadership contrast Limann’s humility vs. Owusu’s formality
Outcome:
Presidential Election 1979:
Dr. Hilla Limann of the PNP won with 62% in the runoff. Victor Owusu of the PFP secured 38%.
Parliamentary Elections: The PNP won a parliamentary majority, relegating the PFP to the opposition. Despite the loss, the PFP laid the groundwork for the eventual emergence of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) in the early 1990s, which continues to carry the Danquah-Busia-Dombo legacy today.
From UP to NPP: Tracing the Roots and Realities of Ghana’s Liberal Democratic Tradition Introduction The political landscape of Ghana has been shaped by two dominant traditions: the Nkrumahist socialist bloc and the Danquah-Busia-Dombo liberal democratic tradition. The latter, now embodied by the New Patriotic Party (NPP), has a rich and complex history rooted in opposition to colonial rule, struggles for constitutional democracy, and a consistent push for liberal economic policies. To understand how the NPP became one of Ghana’s major political forces—especially its stronghold in the Ashanti Region—it is vital to revisit the journey from the United Party (UP) through the Popular Front Party (PFP), and the rise and fall of key parties like the United National Convention (UNC). The Genesis: United Party and Its Founding Parties The United Party (UP) was formed in 1957 after Kwame Nkrumah’s Convention People’s Party (CPP) passed the Avoidance of Discrimination Act, which banned parties based on ethnic, regional, or religious lines. As a response, six main opposition parties merged to form the UP: 1. National Liberation Movement (NLM) – Led by Dr. K. A. Busia, based in the Ashanti Region, and advocating for federalism. 2. Northern People’s Party (NPP) – Led by Simon Diedong Dombo, championing Northern interests. 3. Moslem Association Party (MAP) – Representing Muslim interests, led by Alhaji Yakubu Tali. 4. Anlo Youth Organisation (AYO) – Led by Modesto Apaloo, based in the Volta Region. 5. Ga Shifimo Kpee (GSK) – Representing the Ga people of Accra. 6. Togoland Congress – Led by S. G. Antor, representing British Togoland interests. Together, these parties sought to check the growing power of Nkrumah’s CPP and maintain multi-party democracy. Dr. J. B. Danquah, an intellectual giant and political philosopher, served as the ideological father of this tradition. He was a co-founder of the United Gold Coast Convention (UGCC) and is credited with naming the country “Ghana.” Dr. Busia’s Exile and the Dombo Stewardship By the late 1950s, the CPP government had grown increasingly authoritarian. Using the Preventive Detention Act, it cracked down on opposition figures. Dr. K. A. Busia, then leader of the UP, went into exile in 1959, fearing arrest and persecution. In his absence, Simon D. Dombo took over leadership and became the moral force behind the party’s survival under repression. The Danquah-Busia Revival: Progress Party and PFP After Nkrumah was overthrown in 1966, Busia returned to politics and led the Progress Party (PP) to victory in 1969, becoming Prime Minister. However, his government was short-lived, as it was overthrown by Colonel Ignatius Kutu Acheampong in 1972. When the ban on party politics was lifted in 1979, the Popular Front Party (PFP) emerged as the direct successor to the PP and UP. It was led by Victor Owusu, a brilliant lawyer and former Attorney General. The PFP championed liberal democratic values, rule of law, and market-driven economic policies—core pillars of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition. Why the PFP Lost the 1979 Elections In the 1979 elections, the People’s National Party (PNP), led by Dr. Hilla Limann, defeated the PFP. Several factors contributed to this outcome:
Residual resentment from Busia’s era: Many voters remembered economic hardships under Busia’s 1969–72 government. Perception of elitism: Victor Owusu was seen as aloof and disconnected from the ordinary Ghanaian. Nkrumahist loyalty: Limann and the PNP capitalized on enduring loyalty to Kwame Nkrumah, especially in the rural and Volta areas. Opposition fragmentation: The United National Convention (UNC), led by William Ofori-Atta, a fellow member of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition, split the anti-Nkrumahist vote.
The United National Convention (UNC) The UNC was formed in 1979 by breakaway members of the PFP who were dissatisfied with Victor Owusu’s leadership. It was led by William Ofori-Atta (Paa Willie), one of “The Big Six” and a respected elder. The party drew support from the Volta Region and other areas sympathetic to moderation and moral leadership. Though the UNC performed well in the 1979 elections—winning seats and influence—it inadvertently helped the PNP by dividing the opposition. However, the UNC’s support was short-lived, especially in its Volta strongholds. The resurgence of Nkrumahist sentiments, coupled with strategic political realignments, saw the region return to parties that better represented its post-colonial aspirations—mainly the PNP and later the NDC. Why the Danquah-Busia-Dombo Tradition Became Ashanti-Based Originally, the UP tradition had national spread—from the North (Dombo), the East (Apaloo), the South (Danquah), to the Ashanti Region (Busia, NLM). However, over time, the tradition became heavily associated with the Ashanti Region, for several reasons:
The National Liberation Movement (NLM), one of the original factions, was Ashanti-based and arguably the most powerful group in the UP. It commanded the largest support base and constituencies during the late 1950s. Busia himself was Bono (Abron), from Wenchi, and Ashanti loyalty to him solidified over time. The PNP/NDC dominance in the Volta and parts of the North gradually made the Danquah-Busia tradition reliant on its strongest base—Ashanti. Later, when the New Patriotic Party (NPP) was formed in 1992, it drew heavily from PFP and UNC remnants, but Ashanti remained its organizational and electoral heartland.
Thus, the NPP’s branding as an “Ashanti party” is more the result of historical evolution and electoral realities than founding ideology. Conclusion The evolution of the NPP is a story of ideological resilience, shifting political alliances, and historical circumstance. From the United Party (UP) through the Progress Party (PP), Popular Front Party (PFP), and even the United National Convention (UNC), the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition has weathered authoritarianism, exile, fragmentation, and reinvention. Today’s youth must understand that political traditions like the NPP did not emerge overnight. They are rooted in long-standing struggles for democracy, rule of law, and economic freedom. By understanding this history, the younger generation can participate more meaningfully in Ghana’s political future—armed with knowledge, not just loyalty.
