A renewed debate has resurrected over the demands for the renaming of some national monuments and institutions particularly the Kotoka International Airport (KIA).
Prominent legal scholars, Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare, and Professor H. Kwesi Prempeh have engaged in a public intellectual exchange over the constitutional basis for renaming institutions named after controversial historical figures.
This followed a legal challenge by Democracy Hub and the Convention People’s Party (CPP) seeking to remove the name of Lieutenant-General Emmanuel Kwasi Kotoka from the Kotoka International Airport (KIA) as a necessary step in reinforcing Ghana’s commitment to democratic governance.
In their lawsuit, they describe Kotoka’s role in the 1966 coup that overthrew Nkrumah as a violation of democratic principles and an affront to Ghana’s constitutional order.
They also argue that celebrating his name through a major national infrastructure sends the wrong message about Ghana’s stance on unconstitutional overthrows of government.
The move, which has gained traction among political and civil society groups, raises broader questions about historical memory, constitutional principles, and the selective renaming of public institutions.
Professor Asare, a Democracy and Development Fellow in Public Law and Justice at CDD-Ghana, in his view, strongly argued that the 1992 Constitution, which serves as the guiding document for Ghana’s governance, explicitly rejects both coups and a one-party state.
“For the avoidance of doubt, this is not an opinion on Nkrumah, a one-party state, or the renaming of institutions, although to be sure I have strong opinions on these topics. In fact, I am against renaming institutions.
“Rather, this is simply saying that one can’t argue that the constitution’s stance against coups justifies renaming places named after Kotoka or other coup leaders any more than its rejection of a one-party state warrants renaming institutions named after Nkrumah.”
Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare, D&D Fellow in Public Law and Justice at CDD-Ghana
He contended that if the justification for renaming institutions is based on the Constitution’s disapproval of coups, then the same logic should apply to figures associated with one-party rule.
“Article 3(1) rejects a one-party state. Nkrumah led Ghana into one in 1964. So why does KNUST still bear his name?” he questioned, referring to the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST).
He further argued that the principle of selective renaming could lead to a historical slippery slope, where national memory is determined by subjective political interpretations rather than historical objectivity.
H. Kwesi Prempeh’s Counter View
However, Professor Prempeh, the Executive Director of the CDD-Ghana countered this argument by making a clear distinction between the legal nature of coups and one-party rule.
According to him, “A coup d’état is ab initio unconstitutional. Not so with a one-party state. Nkrumah’s one-party state was established in accordance with the appropriate constitutional process at the time.”
He highlighted that Nkrumah’s governance spanned multiple regime types from 1951 to 1966, with the one-party state being just one phase of his administration.
As such, he argued, naming monuments after Nkrumah does not inherently glorify a one-party state.
In response, Professor Asare challenged the notion that the historical legality of a regime should determine its place in national memory.
He asserted that constitutional processes can be manipulated to justify undemocratic rule, drawing parallels to modern cases where leaders extend their tenure through constitutional amendments.
“In reality, many things can be established through constitutional processes—modern coups, for instance, are often effectuated by tinkering with the Constitution. A lot of third and fourth terms are all coups in disguise!
“The key point is that the 1992 Constitution is being used as the anchor for renaming things it explicitly disapproves of”.
Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare, D&D Fellow in Public Law and Justice at CDD-Ghana
He also questioned the selective attribution of Kotoka’s legacy solely to his role in the 1966 coup, arguing that other aspects of his service, such as his military contributions in the Congo and his valour at the airport, should also be considered in the debate over his historical legacy.
Professor Asare warned that “selectively renaming places based on what the Constitution frowns upon is a dangerous precedent. It raises concerns about historical cherry-picking and the broader implications for national memory and identity.”
Professor Prempeh, however, maintained that coups represent a unique and clear violation of constitutional order, making them fundamentally different from governance models that were established through legal, albeit controversial, means.
His argument suggested that while historical reassessment is valid, it must be done with a nuanced understanding of constitutional legitimacy.
For now, the court will have the final say on the legal merits of removing Kotoka’s name from the Kotoka International Airport.
But beyond the courtroom, this debate underscores the need for a national conversation on how Ghana balances historical memory with democratic principles, ensuring that its past is neither selectively forgotten nor uncritically celebrated.
READ ALSO: Enhancing Ghana’s Energy Sector Governance for Sustainable Growth
