Ghana’s democratic journey, often hailed across Africa since the adoption of the 1992 Constitution, stands as a beacon of electoral stability and peaceful transitions. Yet beneath this glowing reputation lies a stark civic truth: millions of Ghanaians remain unaware of their constitutional rights and responsibilities.
This civic deficit casts a dark shadow over the effectiveness of the National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE), the very institution mandated under Article 233 of the constitution to foster civic awareness, instil democratic values, and promote national cohesion.
While the NCCE has long decried chronic underfunding, a legitimate concern, this alone no longer explains its limited impact. A deeper, structural flaw lies within the Constitution itself, particularly in how leadership roles at the Commission are defined and assigned.
Article 235(1) of the 1992 Constitution confers on the Chairperson of the NCCE the same terms and conditions as a Justice of the Court of Appeal, with Deputy Chairpersons equated to Justices of the High Court. While this provision was undoubtedly well-intentioned, to lend gravitas to the Commission, it has inadvertently entrenched a legalistic leadership orientation.
But civic education is not about legal advocacy or judicial reasoning. It is fundamentally about communication—engaging, educating, informing, communicating for behavioural change, and inspiring people across cultures, age groups, literacy levels, and geographies.
It is development communication, deeply embedded in strategic communication principles such as behavioural insight, audience segmentation, message tailoring, and creative delivery.
To drive meaningful civic transformation, the NCCE must integrate communication leadership at its highest levels. At least one of its top three leaders must be a seasoned communication and public relations professional, not a lawyer with marginal exposure to communication, but an expert grounded in strategic communication, public engagement, campaign management, and behavioural change communication.
Having a PR department within the NCCE is not enough. Often sidelined from strategic decision-making, such units tend to focus on firefighting—reactive, tactical, and crisis-driven communication—rather than leading proactive, sustained, and insight-driven civic education strategies.
Embedding communication at the apex of leadership would ensure that every major NCCE strategy is not only well-articulated but also well-received by the public. A Deputy Chairperson responsible for communication, for instance, would serve as a strategic advisor to the Chairperson, shaping messaging, protecting the institution’s brand, and guiding how civic education aligns with public sentiment and national priorities.
This role would lead the Commission’s public-facing campaigns, shape its national narrative, and advise on risks, public perceptions, and stakeholder engagement. It is this kind of foresight that enables institutions to pivot from reactive messaging to anticipatory, transformative, and strategic communication.
President John Dramani Mahama’s inauguration of the Constitutional Review Committee presents a historic window to fix structural inefficiencies. It is time to revisit Article 235, not to strip away legal competence from the NCCE, but to enrich its leadership with communication expertise—so it can fulfil its civic education mandate more effectively.
The three core objectives of civic education are awareness, acceptance, and action, which are inherently communication outcomes. Elevating communication to a leadership function will help bridge the gap between policy and public understanding, repositioning the NCCE as a powerful engine of democratic growth and social transformation.
Ghana is witnessing a worrying erosion of civic values. Patriotism is fading. Public discourse is increasingly toxic. The communal spirit that once defined our society is giving way to self-interest and cynicism. Corruption, influence peddling, indiscipline, and apathy are becoming disturbingly normal.
These are not just governance failures. There are communication breakdowns, failures to engage the citizenry, to instil national values, and to reorient attitudes.
Today, the youth see governance as a self-serving enterprise. Civic disillusionment is growing. Without a deliberate communication strategy to re-engage and re-educate the populace, Ghana risks nurturing a generation that is civically detached and democratically disengaged.
President Mahama’s recent Code of Conduct for public appointees is a commendable step toward ethical governance. But ethics codes alone won’t transform mindsets. What is needed is a year-round, nationwide civic education campaign, led by communication professionals with deep expertise in strategic messaging, audience behaviour, and public discourse.
Such a campaign must be grounded in communication science, not slogans. It must reflect lived realities, adapt to changing times, and address civic education as an evolving conversation, not a fixed curriculum.
Indeed, the NCCE should evolve into more than a civic education body. It should become a strategic communication engine for national reorientation. To achieve this, it must have leadership with the right skills. Communication professionals bring not just message delivery, but also values alignment, brand clarity, public trust-building, and national consensus-building.
For instance, by appointing a Deputy Chairperson with communication expertise, Ghana would be taking a bold step toward realigning civic education with the tools and methods proven to change minds and influence behaviour.
Ghana cannot expect democratic resilience without civic renewal. Furthermore, we cannot have civic renewal without communication competence at the heart of national education efforts. As the saying goes, “To be informed is to be transformed; to be uninformed is to be deformed.”
As a majority of Ghanaians desire a system that reflects the interests of the larger society, the Constitution must evolve to incorporate the modern tools required for nation-building. Now is the moment to act—during this constitutional review process—not just to protect our democracy, but to strengthen and future-proof it.
