In a recent statement, Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin highlighted a concerning trend of high attrition in Ghana’s legislative house, attributing it to voters’ tendency to elect Members of Parliament (MPs) based on factors other than competence in the legislative processes.

Bagbin expressed dismay that lawmakers often face rejection at the polls for “frivolous reasons” rather than their actual performance or commitment to constituents.

“The choice of an MP is influenced by some considerations, and not competence or care for the people, and so you see the kind of competition that is ongoing when we are doing either parliamentary primaries or the main event itself.”
Rt. Hon. Alban Bagbin

He called for stakeholder engagement to address this worrying situation, emphasizing the importance of selecting MPs based on their ability to effectively represent the people.

The Speaker’s concerns shed light on a complex issue. However, it must be emphasized that Parliament itself may be a significant contributor to its attrition problem.

In Ghana, parliamentary campaigns often involve candidates making grand promises, particularly around issues of poverty alleviation and economic development. However, the actual implementation of these promises falls short, leading to public disillusionment.

particularly, this discrepancy arises because, by the nation’s governance governance architecture, MPs are primarily lawmakers, not active agents of development. While they play a role in the development of their constituencies, it is often minimal and more intangible than tangible.

However, the disconnect between their roles as lawmakers and the promises made during campaigns remains a great contributor to the saddening trend.

In addition, Parliamentarians often do not engage constituents on parliamentary issues, assuming that their constituents have relinquished their right to influence decisions after voting for them. The heavy reliance on party whips in the House further marginalizes constituents in parliamentary activities.

This systemic de-participation persist over the four-year mandate, leaving constituents wondering about their MP’s accomplishments, even if the MP have sponsored bills or argued for legislative proposals. To address this, MPs must actively involve their constituents in parliamentary engagements, fostering a more inclusive and participatory democracy.

MMDCEs Election Bill Could Save Parliament A Big Deal

Another significant factor influencing Parliament’s attrition rate is the appointment of Metropolitan, Municipal, and District Chief Executives (MMDCEs) by the President. Currently appointed by the President, MMDCEs lack direct accountability to their local populations. Meanwhile, MMDCEs are the primary representative of the central government in communities. MMDCEs are resourced and mandated to raise IGFs to undertake tangible developmental projects.

“There shall be a District Chief Executive for every district who shall be appointed by the President with the prior approval of not less than two-thirds majority of members of the Assembly present and voting at the meeting.”
Article 243 (1) , 1992 Constitution

Over the years, this appointment has not only brewed violence at such meetings but also seen non-performing MMDCEs escape the burden of accountability as Parliamentarians absorb all the brunt.

To increase accountability of MMDCEs, many have urged that they are voted for rather than appointed. If they were directly elected, they could serve as a crucial bridge between the community and the central government, ensuring that campaign promises translate into tangible actions and policies. This local accountability could potentially influence the behavior of MMDCEs who have been very reserved in performing their duties as they attempt to sway voters in year-in year-out elections.

The call for the direct election of MMDCEs aligns with the broader theme of decentralization and local empowerment. This shift in power dynamics can lead to better governance at the local level, enabling targeted policies and initiatives to address poverty-related challenges. While a recent attempt to amend the constitution for the direct election of MMDCEs faced challenges and was withdrawn, the idea remains pivotal for fostering a more responsive and accountable system of governance.

Recently, the Ghana Catholic Bishops’ Conference urged relevant stakeholders to reconsider the election of MMDCEs to enhance Ghana’s governance system.

It reiterated that the election of MMDCEs will ensure effective local governance.

“As we have indicated in our previous communiqué, decentralization, which seeks to promote effective Local Governance System, is the way to bring governance and its benefits to the people and improve the participation of citizens in the governance process. It enhances democracy at the grassroots, inclusiveness and accountability. Sadly, the decentralization has become a mirage.”

It is imperative on the legislative House to be more flexible and more participatory throughout its four-year mandate to evolve Ghana’s political landscape towards a more inclusive, accountable, and responsive governance structure. But also, passing the Bill to elect MMDCEs will allow the House to focus on legislation more.

MMDCEs could actually act as a second chamber of the people’s representation.

Parliament must simply bring back the Bill on MMDCEs’ election to save itself. Until then, Parliamentarians should desist from proposals of protecting any seat in the hallowed Chambers of Parliament from being held accountable, irrespective of the messianic legislative prowess of any of its occupants.