By Mathias HOUNKPE and Olivier
BUCYANA
I. Background
In the Republic of Ghana, the
first thirty years of its existence were mostly characterized by military rule
interspersed with two brief periods (1969-72 and 1979-81) of regimes that were
more or less freely elected. However, from January 1993 Ghana established its
Fourth Republic through the adoption of a new constitution which provided for
liberal democratic institutional arrangements. Since then, the country has held
six multi-party elections (with at least two alternations of power) making this
latest republic the longest serving civilian regime in the country’s history.
Ghana’s institutions have also shown
great capacity in dealing with some of the challenges that are (as in most new
democracies) sources of instability and/or violence. For instance, they have known
two closely contested elections (2008 and 2012) where the defeated party gracefully
accepted the results with little or no upheaval. In the case of the latter
elections, the Supreme Court had to eventually intervene and decide the winner,
after which the ruling was unanimously accepted. Another example was Ghana’s
smooth transition of power with the passing away of the Late Professor Atta
Mills in 2012. Here we witnessed an entirely seamless transition of power, quite
contrary to what is often experienced in other ‘democracies’ in the region.
Ghana’s 1992 Constitution has provided
for the establishment of an Electoral Commission (EC), which has played a
notable role in appeasing electoral tension and ensuring smooth changes in
power. The EC is an independent body in charge of the policy making and the management
of electoral activities in Ghana. Its functions include the compilation of
register of voters and the demarcation of electoral boundaries for national and
local government elections. The EC also oversees the conduct and supervision of
all public elections and referenda. In addition, it is also in charge of
educating all Ghanaian citizens on the electoral process and its purpose, as
well as undertaking programmes for the expansion of the registration of voters[1].
While at its establishment in
1993, the EC was viewed with public suspicion (especially from the then opposition
parties), it used proactive and pro-transparency reforms and initiatives to quickly
win the confidence of political actors and the general public. For example, by establishing
the Inter-Party Advisory Committee (IPAC), a body consisting of representatives
of various political parties, some CSOs (as observers) and members of the EC (a
channel of information between the Commission and parties), greater consensus
on contested electoral issues in the country has been built.
The adoption of a biometric voter
registry and the use of voter verification machines are also recent
EC-initiated measures to help increase transparency of the electoral process. However,
it is worth noting that despite these positive measures, public trust in the EC
has decreased somewhat in recent years,[2] This dwindling trust can
be explained, among other things, by the 2012 general elections petition and
what it unveiled as serious flaws in the management of the elections by the EC,
such as the mistakes in replacing the deputy chairs of the Commission who
retired in 2014, the challenges confronting the Commission in the organization
of the district level elections and lastly the fact that some stakeholders see
the new Chair of the EC as not having past experience in elections and being
too close to the ruling party…
In Ghana, the youth –aged between
15 and 35 – represent an important segment of the country’s population.
According to 2010 population census estimates, the youth represents about 35
per cent of Ghana’s population and are seen by every stakeholder – from
government officials and state institutions to civil society organizations and
development partners – as an important
human resource with the potential to contribute significantly to national
development, and therefore must be accorded such recognition and be involved in
national development by government and other stakeholders…[3] The inherent value Ghana
places in its youth population is also clearly exemplified in the government’s
own efforts. For example, there is a national youth policy which provides the
conceptual framework to direct major stakeholders (including the youth
themselves) to work towards youth participation in national development. In
addition, there are state institutions – like the EC – whose members and
clients include youth; there are civil society organizations (CSOs) which
provide interventions that directly target the youth and all major political
parties in Ghana have ‘youth wings’ on most campuses.
II. Youth Participation in Politics and Elections
Youth participation in Ghana goes
back as far as the precolonial era and has mostly consisted in being “forces”/“engines”
of change that have made demands for regime alteration. Such driving forces
have ensured respect for fundamental rights and safeguarding the very basic
needs of its population. In Ghanaian politics, youth groups have been part of
the forces that fought for the independence of the country. Protests organized
by students against deteriorating conditions on university campuses and the
poor state of the economy with its widespread corruption, contributed to the
fall of government[4]
in the 70s and is currently witnessing a resurgence as most Ghanaians in the Occupy Ghana Movement (a self-described ´social
political non-partisan pressure group with the vision of engaging Ghanaians in
development process and ensuring good and responsible governance´[5]) are themselves part of
the youth.
In addition to serving as an
impressive force of demand, Ghana’s youth is also associated in running State
institutions. Because many young people are jobless and poor, politicians manipulate
some of them, especially during elections. The latter is exemplified through
the use of “foot soldiers” to commit electoral fraud. The youth are on some
occasions also used as instruments to implement government policies across the
country, the state controlled Young
Pioneers or the National Union of Ghana Students (NUGS) in the 70s are
prime examples.[6]
In very rare occasions the youth have been involved in the management of the
country, as in working as parliamentarians, ministers, or members of local
council. For instance, less than 9 per cent of the 275 MPs in Ghana are
considered as part of the youth, meaning less than 35 years of age[7] and over 21, the legal age
to qualify as a Member of Parliament (MP).
In Ghana, young people play several
important roles in relation to electoral processes and their managements. Firstly
(and perhaps foremost), young people constitute the majority of the eligible
voting population. In 2012, citizens aged between 18 and 35 made up approximately
58.45 per cent of all registered voters.[8] This figure obviously increases
if the age bracket is nudged just a few more years. In 2000, for instance, citizens
between 18 and 39 comprised some 76 per cent of total registered voters.[9]
Secondly, Ghana’s youth serve as invaluable channels to transmit party messages,
either within and/or for political parties. Some youth also serve as “agents”
representing parties to monitor all the steps – registration, exhibition,
polling and collation – in the electoral process, or as foot soldiers used to
intimidate other parties’ members/candidates. Thirdly, Ghana’s youth are often
the ones the EC looks to hire as polling staff or electoral and registration agents
during election time. And lastly (albeit this role is quite rare), youth may be
candidates for elections, especially for legislative and local government
elections.
There are several major
challenges that prevent effective youth participation in Ghana’s political and
electoral spheres, which include:
- Inadequate legal framework for enhanced
youth participation: As prescribed by Ghana’s Constitution, the voting age
is 18 years. But to (legally) qualify as a member of Parliament (MP) one has to
be at least 21 years old and 40 to run for state presidency. This excludes all
the young people between 18 and 21 (40 for presidency) from potentially
becoming MPs or President of the Republic. In addition, the electoral law does
not provide for any quota nor for any other specific positive discrimination in
favor of the youth.
- Inadequate timing and coordination of initiatives
in favor of youth participation in electoral processes: According to the Constitution,
several bodies are in charge of electoral education and the initiatives
targeting youth do not extend across the whole electoral cycle. They tend to
take place mostly during election period.
- Scarcity of (resource generating/job)
opportunities: The resources beyond political positions are scarce. For
instance, limited opportunities are available for parliamentarians who decide to
retire and possibly join the private sector. For that reason, they prefer
staying in office for as long as they can which in itself presents a barrier
for the youth to be directly involved in the political life of their country.
- Lack of trust in the youth’s capacity to
perform: There is widespread skepticism over the abilities of young people
in Ghana, especially in political positions where in addition to technical
skills and competence, some level of maturity and capacity to deal with
delicate situations are required.
- Manipulation of young people by politicians:
A large proportion of young people are ignorant of their rights and of the electoral
process which exposes them to the manipulations of politicians.
III. Electoral Management Body (EMB) Entry Points
In Ghana, unique among other “new
democracies” in West Africa, the Constitution provides for two main
institutions – namely the EC (EMB) and the National Commission for Civic
Education (NCCE).
The Electoral Commission (EC)
The EC is the sole autonomous
public institution whose main mandate is to organize, conduct and supervise all
public elections in Ghana. As such, the EC is responsible for managing all the
core tasks necessary for the conduct of elections. These include determining
who is eligible to vote and registering eligible voters, receiving and validating
candidacies, overseeing conduct at polling stations, finally counting and
tabulating votes. However, in contrast with many other EMBs in the region, the functions
of Ghana’s EC[10]
go beyond the core tasks of elections. They include the policing of political
party activities including the supervision of their primaries, the demarcation
of electoral boundaries and the conduct and supervision of all public elections
(i.e. referenda and trade unions elections). The EC’s functions also cover the provision
of civic education on the electoral processes, undertaking of programs for the
expansion of voter registration and any other functions as prescribed by law.
When it comes to youth
participation in the electoral process, the EC’s role in Ghana is an indirect
and informal one. In other words, the EC seeks to educate the youth on the
electoral process – not exclusively, but rather as part of the general
electorate. In an informal sense, the EC involves the young people in the
implementation of some of its tasks, such as being electoral agents (i.e.
registration and/or polling agents). The EC assumes this indirect, informal
role vis-à-vis the youth mainly because the electoral legislation (Electoral
Act and Constitution) does not provide for any specific treatment vis-à-vis this
segment of the population when it comes to the EC’s functions and responsibilities.
As the EC’s director of training explains, their education work vis-à-vis the
population (and hence with respect to youth) is only concerned with “the how of the elections” while the National
Commission for Civic Education (NCCE) looks at the why aspects of elections.
The overall objectives of
the EC’s work vis-à-vis the youth are:
- To
ensure that young people know how to vote from the registration phase through
to voting day; and
- To
ensure that these young Ghanaians behave and vote according to electoral
regulations.
The EC engaged in various
activities, not exclusively targeting the young people, which contribute to
promoting youth participation. These, include:
- Seminars,
workshops, and sensitization campaigns – on the required steps to participating
in the elections (from the registration through to voting);
- Seminars,
workshops and sensitization campaigns – on provisions of electoral offences in
order to prevent the youth from violating
electoral laws.
- Training
and logistics – to make sure young people take part in the management of the
electoral process as registration and/or polling agents.
The National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE)
Compared to the EC, the
NCCE contributes (more) substantially to youth participation in Ghana’s
electoral processes, even though it is not directly involved in the management
of activities. Like the EC, the NCCE is also an independent constitutional body,
and among its key functions are ´to
formulate, implement and oversee programs intended to inculcate in the citizens
of Ghana (an) awareness of their civic responsibilities and an appreciation of
their rights and obligations as free people´[11]. In fulfilling its
mandates, the NCCE takes citizens’ participation, and particularly youth’s
participation, very seriously. For instance, its Medium Term Expenditure
Framework (MTEF 2014-2016) provides resources for programs aiming to promote
citizens’ participation in the electoral process, citizens’ participation in
issues of governance at all levels, and women’s empowerment to participate in
political development.
More specifically, when
it comes to youth, the NCCE’s MTEF 2014-2016 provides for a whole subprogram targeting
youth aged between five and 25 years and aims to inculcate in them the virtues
and values of good citizenship. This sub-program covers, among others,
activities aimed at nurturing the youth to be good, patriotic citizens; empowering
and encouraging them to participate in governance issues at all levels; and creating
platforms at the primary, secondary and tertiary levels (and amongst
out-of-school youth) to enhance the appreciation of civic duties.
The NCCE’s activities to
promote youth participation in elections include:
- Sensitization
activities vis-à-vis first time voters (youth);
- Engagement
with political party activists and youth wings of political parties on
non-violence;
- Support
for the establishment and running of Civic Education Clubs;
- Training
of young candidates.
IV. State Institutions and Youth Sensitization
Two key activities implemented by
the EC and NCCE, respectively, concerns youth sensitization and the training of
young political candidates.
Sensitization
campaigns by the EC
For reasons previously mentioned,
young people are exposed to manipulation, particularly by politicians during
election periods. Some of them are the instruments used by politicians to
commit electoral fraud and to intimidate political adversaries. Therefore, in
the pre-election period, the EC specifically targets the youth through
sensitization campaigns in order to prevent electoral fraud and violence.
The youth are sensitized to
prevent them from being easily swayed by politicians to engage in unlawful and
sometimes violent actions. The youth’s behavior during elections can be either
on their own accord, or through pressure exerted by parties and candidates. As
such, the EC expects that through its targeted sensitization events (seminars,
workshops, etc.) it can contribute to the prevention of election-related
conflicts by informing the youth about the electoral processes. More
specifically, these seminars and workshops raise young people’s awareness on the
necessary steps to enjoy their voting rights. Furthermore, they enhance young
people’s education on behaviors and on unlawful actions, such as underage voter
registration, the disruption of authorized campaign rallies or on sanctions
provided for by law for would-be offenders.
In implementing these activities,
the Electoral Commission engages youth groups in places where they are the ‘most
accessible’. For instance, the EC engages political parties to reach members of
their youth wings and young people affiliated with and/or working for parties/candidates
during election times (the aforementioned “foot soldiers” are a good example).
The EC also engages with churches, either by passing messages during masses in
churches and/or by sending resource persons to election-related events
organized by religious leaders. They adopt similar tactics with youth-based civil
society organizations (CSOs) or those holding elections-related activities
targeting young people. Aside from reaching youth through the above-mentioned
stakeholders, the EC also organizes direct sensitization campaigns that target
young people on the same topics mentioned earlier and use radio, TV and even posters
to transmit their messages.
Unfortunately, the EC does not
take any specific actions in order to measure effectiveness of the initiatives
and the results achieved.
Activity
by the National Commission for Civic Education
In the pre-election period, the NCCE
initiates trainings targeting candidates, with specific attention for young
candidates.
The trainings aim was mainly to
raise candidates’ awareness and deepen their understanding on major issues
including their roles and responsibilities and the legal and institutional
frameworks of their mandates if elected. The initiatives by the NCCE also
include meetings between candidates and electorates to allow citizens to share
their concerns and needs with future office holders. These meetings are held for
legislative candidates and in each one of the country’s constituencies they
gather candidates competing for the parliamentary seat in this specific
constituency and their delegates and electorates.
The lack of sufficient financial
resources and logistical problems are part of the challenges faced by the NCCE
while organizing this activity. People’s apathy – i.e. lack of interest and
efforts it takes to get them to the meetings – is also one of the major
difficulties hampering the implementation of this initiative. It is also worth
mentioning that candidates usually show interest in this type of activity and
are often willing to participate.
V. Challenges and Lessons Learned
The challenges by the EC – and to
some extent by the NCCE – in its engagement to promote youth participation in
electoral processes are the following:
- Disempowerment: The youth’s feeling that
participation is not going to make any difference. Young people tend to believe
that their voice is not going be heard and even if it is heard, it is not going
to be accounted for. This contributes, at least partly, to the youth’s lack of
interest (apathy) in the electoral process.
- Apathy: The youth’s lack of interest in
actively taking part in the political life of their country. The way young
people are engaged during electoral processes does not give them the incentive to
participate. Be it by the EC or by the NCCE, young people are targeted during
elections period primarily in a “negative” way. Most of the activities targeting
young people (sensitizations, awareness raising, etc.) aim to prevent them from wrongdoings and have
mostly to do with providing information on “dos” and “don’ts” for peaceful
elections. It is very rare that they are targeted in a “positive” way that is in
such a way to increase their capacities to contribute not only to the quality
of elections but also to the consolidation of democracy. This could be improved
through direct engagement with youth groups early enough in the electoral cycle
to allow meaningful and relevant engagements with them.
- Lack of capacity: Low capacity of the youth
to engage on specific issues with key stakeholders, especially political actors
is another important challenge.
- Lack of adequate resources: Financial
resources are limited and for that reason both the EC and the NCCE face
logistic problems. The latter is especially recognized by all for not having
enough resources for its activities (including from donors). However, the lack
of resources cannot explain the whole story, it is also about priority.
- Lack of effective coordination: Two
constitutional bodies – namely the EC and the NCCE – should to be involved in
engagements with citizens/youth during election time. However, there is no
formal coordination between both, leaving gaps and hence failing to capitalize
on opportunities to synergize activities.
VI. Recommendations
- Youth engagement must be seen as an ongoing
program; one to be run throughout the whole electoral cycle. This will avoid any
“last minute” or ad hoc types of youth electoral engagement and will ensure
that young people are targeted at all stages of the electoral processes, for
instance in the legislative reforms stage. It will also help ensure that
substantive needs, such as the preparation of potential youth candidates, are
done in a timely manner. For instance:
- Advocacy can be conducted towards MPs – by the
EC, the NCCE but also CSOs involved in election works – for the inclusion of
provisions in the electoral legislations on youth’s participation;
- Youth participation must go beyond awareness-raising
about the voting process and the prevention of election-related violence and
conflicts. The youth must also be seen as a positive force able to meaningfully
contribute to credible elections. For instance:
- The EC and the NCCE (or jointly) can engage
youth groups earlier in the electoral cycle in order to identify specific needs
in order to design and implement interventions likely to ensure effective and
“positive” youth participation. This early engagement can help identify
adequate channels/media through which to reach the youth more effectively. This
can also help gain a better understanding of activities to be implemented in
order to enhance issues-based interactions between the youth and
candidates/parties;
- Youth, especially political parties’ youth
wings, should be engaged – by the NCCE but also by domestic and/or
international NGOs – on key issues for meaningful elections (e.g.: draft of
manifestos, communication with voters based on manifestos, how to do political
debates, etc.)
- Young candidates must be taken seriously.
Efforts should be made in collaboration with political parties to strengthen
the NCCE’s work with young candidates. This means at least two things:
- Planning activities for potential/aspirant youth
candidates in order to prepare them for a meaningful participation in the
electoral process
- Engaging newly elected young office holders with
programs likely to help them get quickly on the job endowed with necessary capacities
These
activities should involve mostly experience sharing and be conducted by the
domestic and/or international NGOs or by the NCCE.
- A coordination and collaboration between the
NCCE and the EC on the engagement of youth in election time will be really
helpful. Meetings to foster joint planning will increase the level of
collaboration between both institutions. Like the EC does with some of the
electoral process stakeholders (e.g. political parties through the IPAC), the
commission should look into holding periodical meetings with the NCCE - especially
in post-elections phase to engage the youth on some of the substantive
questions - on issues relating to youth involvement in elections. Within an
environment of limited resources, the later will help ensure the
complementarity of initiatives and the necessary synergy in targeting the youth
in joint activities whenever possible.
VII. Annex 1: List of References
1. Amadu Musah Abudu &
Moses Naiim Fuseini, ´Civic Awarenss and Engagement in Ghana: The Curricular
Implication´, European Scientific Journal,
Volume 10, No. 4, February 2014
2. CODEO, ´Citizens
participation in Elections in Ghana: lessons from the 2012 elections.
Perspectives from a Youth-oriented organization´, CODEO review workshop, march
25-26, 2013
3. Goerge M. Bob-Milliar, ´Party
Youth Activists and Low-Intensity Electoral Violence in Ghana: A qualitative
Study of Party Foot Soliders’ Activism´, African
Studies Quarterly, Volume 15, Issue 1, December 2014.
4. Ghana Electoral Commission –
http://www.ec.gov.gh/about-ec/
5. Harrison Belley, ´The
Concept of Civic Education Clubs (CECs), in Ghana´, Best Practices Manual on
Democracy Education
6. IDEA, ´Youth Participation
in Politics and Elections´, Annual Democracy Forum, 2013
7. Minister of Youth and Sports
of Ghana, ´National Youth Policy: Towards an Empowered Youth, Impacting
Positively on National Development´, August 2010.
8. National Commission for
Civic Education Act – 1993 (Act 452)
9. National Commission for
Civic Education, ´Medium Term Expenditure Framework for 2014-2016´, 2014
10. Ransford Edward Van Gyampo
& Franklin Obeng-Odoom, ´Youth Participation in Local and National
Development in Ghana: 1620-2013´
11. Ransford Edward Van Gyampo, ´The
Youth and Political ideology in Ghanaian Politics´, …
12. UNDP, ´Enhancing youth
Political Participation throughout the Electoral Cycle: A Good Practice Guide´,
2012
[1]
Ghana 1992 Constitution, art. 43 to 46 and the Electoral Commission Act, 1993,
Act 451.
[2]
Afrobarometer round 5 survey, 2013
[3]
National Youth Policy of Ghana, “Towards
an Empowered Youth, Impacting Positively on National Development”, August
2010.
[4] “Youth
Participation in Local and National Development in Ghana: 1620-2013” - Ransford
Edward Van Gyampo & Franklin Obeng-Odoom
[5]
Occupy Ghana January 12, 2015 press statement as shown on Imani website on July
4, 2015 http://imanighana.com/occupy-ghana-press-statement-january-12-2015/
[6] “Youth Participation in Local and National
Development in Ghana: 1620-2013” - Ransford Edward Van Gyampo & Franklin
Obeng-Odoom
[7] In
fact the percentage should be lower because only 8 are less than 35 of age, but
there are 16 of them without mention of their dates of birth (see http://www.parliament.gh/parliamentarians/page/260).
So, by assuming that all the 16 are young, the percentage is still less than
9%.
[8] ´Citizens
participation in Elections in Ghana: lessons from the 2012 elections.
Perspectives from a Youth-oriented organization´, CODEO review workshop, March
25-26, 2013.
[9] ´The Youth and Political Ideology in Ghanaian
Politics´ - Ransford Edward Van Gyampo
[11]
National Commission for Civic Education Act – 1993 (Act 452).
