Professor H. Kwasi Prempeh, chairman of Ghana’s Constitutional Review Committee, has called for systemic reforms to address the country’s “winner-takes-all” political structure, arguing that electoral losers should be assigned formal roles to foster inclusive governance.
The constitutional scholar emphasized that such a shift could mitigate persistent post-election divisions and reduce unproductive opposition tactics.
In a recent social media post, Prempeh criticized the current framework, which he claims leaves defeated candidates and their supporters with little incentive to collaborate constructively. “We need to do something about this winner-take-all thing so that losers, too, can get something useful to do instead of staying in a foul campaign mode 24/7 for the next 4 yrs,” he wrote. The academic suggested that integrating opposition figures into governance processes could channel their energy toward national development rather than relentless criticism.
Prempeh’s remarks come amid longstanding debates over Ghana’s political culture, where electoral defeat often sidelines parties until the next vote. Critics argue this dynamic exacerbates polarization, with opposition groups frequently prioritizing obstruction over policy engagement. The professor’s proposal aligns with broader discussions about constitutional amendments to decentralize power, though past efforts have seen limited traction.
Ghana’s 1992 constitution establishes a presidential system that concentrates authority in the executive branch, a model shared by many post-independence African nations. Some countries, like Kenya and South Africa, have experimented with coalition governments or opposition-inclusive appointments to ease tensions. While such measures have had mixed success, Prempeh’s intervention reflects growing regional scrutiny of winner-takes-all systems, particularly in democracies grappling with cyclical electoral strife.
Political analysts note that Ghana’s stable yet competitive multiparty system could serve as a testing ground for incremental reforms. However, skepticism persists about the feasibility of redistributing roles in a landscape where patronage and party loyalty remain entrenched. As the Constitutional Review Committee continues its work, Prempeh’s advocacy may reignite calls to balance majority rule with mechanisms for broader political participation.
