Exclusive reports by King Amoah, our-editor-jn-chief.
In recent times, the Ghanaian political environment has been marked by deepening divisions and egregious instances of violence, which some citizens believe have gone unchecked under the leadership of President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo.
Amidst this turmoil, the role of the National Peace Council has come under scrutiny, with many questioning its effectiveness and impartiality as a mediator in the prevailing political crisis.
The Perception of Bias.
Recent opinion polls suggest that a significant portion of the Ghanaian populace views the Peace Council as an instrument of the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP) rather than a neutral arbiter committed to fostering national harmony. Critics argue that the Council has failed to confront the alleged wrongdoings of the Akufo-Addo administration, instead opting to downplay the gravity of ongoing state violence, political intimidation, and killings of innocent citizens.
This perception of bias is troubling. The Peace Council was established with the paramount aim of fostering peace, preventing conflict, and promoting national cohesion.
However, when a government is accused of human rights violations, abatement of dissent, and a culture of impunity, the silence or inaction of entities like the Peace Council can give the impression that they are merely functioning as an arm of the government rather than an independent body advocating for justice.
A Comparative Analysis: NPP vs. NDC.
The NPP’s response to dissent and criticism has been characterized by force, according to several human rights organizations. This has raised critical questions about the Council’s commitment to addressing such issues head-on.
For instance, political violence often escalates in the lead-up to elections, and many Ghanaians have been quick to voice their disbelief in the Peace Council’s capacity to mediate effectively when concerns are raised about the NPP’s governance.
On the other hand, some argue that the Council’s actions or inactions may reflect a reluctance to provoke the NPP while suggesting that criticism aimed at the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) could result in more tangible resolutions.
This is a perplexing notion, as it risks undermining the very foundation of democratic discourse.
The Call for Accountability.
Critical stakeholders are now calling for the Peace Council to take a more proactive stance against the violent episodes that have marred the political scene in Ghana.
It is crucial for any council or organization that holds the title of “peace” to assess its stance and actively engage in dialogues aimed at accountability and transparency.
The role of civil society organizations, media, and advocacy groups becomes even more vital in pushing for these changes, ensuring that the voice of the people is not drowned out by political favoritism or indifference.
Toward a More Peaceful Ghana.
For Ghana to move forward, it is imperative that organizations like the Peace Council cultivate a more balanced approach. They must prioritize the welfare of all Ghanaians, championing justice for victims of state violence regardless of political affiliation.
An unbiased Peace Council could help heal the nation’s wounds, foster understanding among entrenched factions, and promote accountability, crucial elements for genuine peace.
Lastly, the Ghanaian populace remains hopeful for a future where peace is not just an ideal but a reality achieved through sustained activism, transparency, and a commitment to justice for every citizen.
It is time for the Peace Council and similar institutions to step beyond casual politicking and embody the essence of their namesake—ensuring peace for all in a truly democratic Ghana.
