Nana Ayew Afriye for Running Mate? The NPP Must Be Serious

The New Patriotic Party has done the hard work of putting its house in order. From the congress that elected His Excellency Alhaji Dr Mahamudu Bawumia as flagbearer to the elections of polling station, electoral area, constituency, regional, diaspora and national officers, the party has assembled a formidable structure. We have completed the major internal processes required to prepare for the task ahead. Our focus should now be singular: holding the John Mahama government to account and building a credible path back to power in 2028.

And what a government we have to scrutinise.

We have a government struggling to contain the cocaine menace, with disturbing questions about our borders and the conduct of some security personnel. We have a government whose promises on galamsey, the 24-hour economy and job creation remain under intense public scrutiny. We have rising electricity tariffs and fuel costs, organised labour raising concerns about wages and the cost of living, and thousands of qualified young people facing uncertainty over access to secondary education. We have witnessed the arrest of opposition figures in circumstances that have raised concerns about the selective application of state power, alongside continuing debate about the politicisation of independent institutions. Even the cedi’s relative stability against the dollar, one of the government’s most frequently cited achievements, has yet to translate into the financial relief many households expect.

This is the political terrain on which the NPP must operate. We have a government to challenge, a public to persuade and an election to win. Yet, just when our attention should be fixed on these national concerns, some people within our own party appear determined to manufacture a different conversation.

For weeks, there has been a sustained attempt by certain individuals to promote Nana Ayew Afriye as a potential running mate to Dr Bawumia. From what I have gathered, there are questions about whether this campaign is being driven by the aspirant himself or by supporters seeking to build momentum around his name. Either way, the proposition deserves serious scrutiny. A running-mate position is not a consolation prize, a reward for political loyalty or an opportunity to test an aspirant’s popularity. It is one of the most consequential appointments a presidential candidate can make.

The question is simple: what exactly does Nana Ayew Afriye bring to the ticket that makes this conversation worth having?

Nana Ayew Afriye is the Ranking Member on Parliament’s Health Committee. That position gives him a significant platform to scrutinise the government’s health policies, examine expenditure, expose administrative failures and demand answers from the Ministry of Health. With persistent concerns surrounding the management of the health sector, the NPP needs its parliamentary representatives to be forceful, prepared and relentless.

Yet, many party faithful are asking whether Ayew Afriye has been sufficiently effective in holding Health Minister Kwabena Mintah Akandoh to account. Where are the sustained, consequential interventions that should distinguish a ranking member from an ordinary backbencher? Where is the parliamentary pressure that forces a minister to answer difficult questions and correct failures? If the government is vulnerable on health, why has the Minority not made that vulnerability count more decisively?

The questions become even more pertinent when one considers the allegations and perceptions circulating among party members concerning a hospital associated with Ayew Afriye and arrangements under which newly recruited security-service personnel are reportedly directed to undertake mandatory medical examinations at that facility.

Does such an arrangement exist in the form being described? If it does, what is the nature of the contractual or administrative arrangement, and has it affected the independence or intensity of his parliamentary scrutiny? More importantly, can Ayew Afriye demonstrate that his responsibilities as Ranking Member have been discharged without any conflict of interest, actual or perceived?

These are legitimate questions of public accountability, not findings of wrongdoing. But they require clear answers, particularly from a man whose name is being promoted for one of the highest political offices in the country.

And here is the more immediate question: if the Minority Members serving on the Health Committee were to choose their ranking member afresh today, would Ayew Afriye command their confidence? Would he win their support on the strength of his performance, his leadership and the effectiveness of his scrutiny?

If the answer is uncertain, why should the party be discussing his elevation to the running-mate position?

A running mate must be able to confront difficult ministers, defend the party’s record, articulate policy and command public confidence. If questions persist about a candidate’s performance in the parliamentary responsibility already entrusted to him, the sensible response is to address those questions first, not to promote him to a position of greater consequence.

There is another matter that ought not to be swept aside simply because it is politically inconvenient. During the Eighth Parliament, when Ayew Afriye chaired the Health Committee, questions were reportedly raised about the Lightwave project and allegations involving payments said to have been made to parliamentary figures. The name Dzaba has featured in accounts of the controversy, and there have been claims that the individual was publicly raising concerns about the matter.

These are serious allegations, and they must be treated as allegations unless supported by verifiable evidence. Nevertheless, the public interest demands clarity.

Does Ayew Afriye know Dzaba? Did he have any dealings or discussions with him concerning the Lightwave project? What exactly happened in relation to the project, and were any concerns raised about payments, procurement or the conduct of those involved? Did Akandoh, who served as Ranking Member at the time, have any role in the matters being discussed? What records exist to establish what happened, and have the relevant questions ever been answered satisfactorily?

If there is no substance to these claims, Ayew Afriye should have every opportunity to say so and provide the facts. But if questions remain unresolved, why should the party rush to elevate him without first establishing the truth?

The NPP cannot afford to operate on rumours, but neither should it ignore questions merely because the person concerned is politically useful to some people. A serious party examines the record before making decisions of this magnitude.

If a running-mate aspirant cannot put difficult questions about his own record to rest, why should the party invite a much larger national conversation about his suitability?

There is a more fundamental weakness in the argument for Ayew Afriye: his executive experience.

To the best of the public record available to me, Ayew Afriye has not served as a substantive Minister or Deputy Minister. That does not automatically disqualify him from higher office, but it raises a fair question about the depth of his experience in executive administration. A running mate must be prepared to assume national responsibility, represent the country, contribute to policy direction and, if circumstances require, be ready for the highest office in the land.

What executive record does Ayew Afriye offer to demonstrate that he is ready for those responsibilities? What major national programme has he administered? What ministerial brief has he managed? What evidence can he present of having handled the difficult balance between policy, budgets, institutions and public expectations that executive office demands?

These are not unreasonable tests. They are the minimum questions that any serious party should ask before considering a running mate.

Ghana’s own political history offers a useful benchmark. John Evans Atta Mills brought the stature of a law professor and former Head of the Internal Revenue Service; John Mahama had served as Deputy Minister and Minister for Communications; Paa Kwesi Amissah-Arthur had served as Governor of the Bank of Ghana; Professor Jane Naana Opoku-Agyemang had been a Vice-Chancellor and Minister for Education; and Dr Bawumia himself had served as Deputy Governor of the Bank of Ghana. Their routes to high office differed, but each brought a substantial record of professional, institutional or executive responsibility. What, then, has Nana Ayew Afriye done to demonstrate comparable preparation for the demands of a national ticket?

Consider the circumstances in which Dr Bawumia became the NPP’s running mate in 2008. He brought a distinguished professional background in economics, including service as Deputy Governor of the Bank of Ghana and experience in international economic policy. His selection had a clear strategic logic: he offered a particular set of technical credentials that complemented the presidential candidate and strengthened the ticket’s economic proposition.

That does not mean every future running mate must have an identical career path. It means the party must be able to explain what a candidate adds to the ticket and why that contribution matters to the electoral contest.

What is the corresponding case for Ayew Afriye? What distinctive strength does he bring that the party cannot obtain from other qualified figures with stronger executive records, greater national reach or a more compelling electoral proposition?

If the answer rests largely on his support for Dr Bawumia, then the argument is deficient. Supporting a flagbearer is part of party politics. It is not, in itself, a qualification for the vice-presidential nomination.

Can a flagbearer with northern roots make a compelling case for a running mate who also has northern roots, even if that running mate represents a constituency in another region? That is a legitimate question in the arithmetic of Ghanaian electoral politics, where regional representation, voter perceptions and geographical balance can influence the appeal of a presidential ticket.

The running-mate debate must therefore be informed by electoral realities. A presidential ticket is a national proposition, and its composition requires careful consideration of geography, political identity, voter perceptions and the candidate’s ability to complement the flagbearer.

Ayew Afriye has his own regional and personal background. Although he was constitutionally qualified to serve as Member of Parliament for Effiduase, that legal qualification does not make the facts of his background untrue. His mother is from Kotokoli, while his father is from Akropong in the Eastern Region. These dimensions form part of the broader electoral context in which the NPP must make its choice.

The question, therefore, is whether selecting a candidate perceived by voters as northern in origin would strengthen or complicate the ticket’s electoral appeal. How would the party explain that choice to voters across the Eastern, Ashanti, Central, Greater Accra and other regions? What additional electoral advantage would Ayew Afriye deliver? Which constituencies would become more competitive because of his selection? What evidence supports the belief that he would broaden the ticket’s appeal?

Regional origin should never be treated as a person’s sole qualification or disqualification. But electoral strategy cannot be conducted in a vacuum. If an aspirant is to be promoted as a strategic choice, those advocating for him must explain the strategic advantage.

It is not enough to say that he is loyal, available or interested in the position. The party needs evidence of electoral value.

If Ayew Afriye’s selection cannot be justified by his record, his executive experience or a persuasive electoral calculation, what exactly is the case for him?

The running-mate debate must also be informed by the realities of Ghanaian electoral politics. A presidential ticket is a national proposition, and its composition requires careful consideration of geography, political identity, voter perceptions and the candidate’s ability to complement the flagbearer.

Ayew Afriye has his own regional and personal background. Although he was constitutionally qualified to serve as Member of Parliament for Effiduase, that legal qualification does not make the facts of his background untrue. His mother is from Kotokoli, while his father is from Akropong in the Eastern Region. These dimensions form part of the broader electoral context in which the NPP must make its choice.

The question is whether selecting a candidate perceived by voters as northern in origin would strengthen or complicate the ticket’s electoral appeal. How would the party explain that choice to voters across the Eastern, Ashanti, Central, Greater Accra and other regions? What additional electoral advantage would Ayew Afriye deliver? Which constituencies would become more competitive because of his selection? What evidence supports the belief that he would broaden the ticket’s appeal?

Regional origin should never be treated as a person’s sole qualification or disqualification. But electoral strategy cannot be conducted in a vacuum. If an aspirant is to be promoted as a strategic choice, those advocating for him must explain the strategic advantage.

It is not enough to say that he is loyal, available or interested in the position. The party needs evidence of electoral value.

If Ayew Afriye’s selection cannot be justified by his record, his executive experience or a persuasive electoral calculation, what exactly is the case for him?

The NPP has completed its internal elections, from the polling stations to the national executive level. It has a flagbearer, an organisational structure and a clear objective: to return to power in 2028. The parliamentary primaries remain a major internal process, but the party’s broader mission is already clear.

This is not the time for a self-promotional contest that distracts from the work of opposition. Nor is it the time for supporters to manufacture momentum around a candidacy without first establishing its merits. The party needs to hold the government accountable, develop a credible policy alternative and demonstrate that it has learnt the lessons of the last election.

Dr Bawumia must be free to make his decision on the running mate without being boxed in by manufactured expectations or pressure campaigns. His choice must be based on merit, strategic value, compatibility and the national interest. Anyone who wishes to be considered must be prepared to have their record examined with the same rigour that the NPP applies to the government.

Ayew Afriye should therefore be called to order if he or his supporters are indeed driving a campaign that undermines party focus. He should concentrate on his responsibilities as Ranking Member, demonstrate the effectiveness expected of him and contribute meaningfully to the NPP’s return to power. If he does so, the party can recognise his contribution on its merits.

But the running-mate conversation must be earned, not manufactured.

The NPP is a serious political party. It cannot allow the ambitions of individuals or their supporters to become a substitute for sober judgement. Before anyone sends their boys out to sell a candidacy, they must first ask whether the candidate has the record, experience and strategic value to justify the position being sought.

The question is not whether Nana Ayew Afriye wants to be running mate. The question is whether the NPP can make a compelling case to Ghana that he should be. On the evidence and questions presently before us, that case has yet to be made.