The government has reiterated that the revocation of certain last-minute public service appointments, recruitments and promotions following the December 7, 2024 general elections was purely an administrative decision rooted in law and procedure, not partisan considerations.
This clarification was given by Hon. Felix Kwakye Ofosu, Presidential Spokesperson and Minister of State in charge of Government Communications, during the Government Accountability Series held at the Jubilee House.
Addressing concerns from the public and political observers, the Minister explained that the actions taken were based on findings that several appointments and promotions were carried out in clear violation of established procedures governing the public service during the transition period.
According to him, these actions failed to comply with the regulatory framework and specific directives that were in force at the time. He stressed that the revocations were not the result of a witch hunt or political retaliation against individuals perceived to be aligned with the previous administration.
Rather, the decision was motivated by the need to enforce due process and protect the integrity of public sector administration. He noted that the government had no intention of acting with malice or ill feeling toward any affected individual.
Neglect of Transition Rules
The Minister explained that during political transitions, there are clear rules that guide recruitments, appointments and promotions to ensure fairness, transparency and continuity within the public service.
In this case, investigations revealed that these rules were not adhered to. As a result, the government had an obligation to act in order to uphold the rule of law and maintain accountability within state institutions.
Following its hearings and analysis, the committee recommended that 1,539 appointments, recruitments, and promotions be upheld. These cases met the required procedural threshold and involved individuals who received appointment letters before December 7, 2024.
However, the committee also recommended the revocation of 541 appointments. These cases failed to meet the eighty percent compliance benchmark and involved recruitment processes that concluded after the election date, contrary to established guidelines.
He further indicated that the previous administration was aware that some of the basic requirements for such appointments had not been met. Despite this awareness, the necessary consultations were not undertaken to allow for a joint review of the processes to ensure compliance with laid down rules.
This gap, he said, made the corrective action unavoidable. The revocation exercise, he explained, was the outcome of a detailed review conducted by a committee established by the Chief of Staff.
The committee was tasked with examining all appointments, recruitments and promotions that took place after the December 7 elections. Its mandate was to determine whether these actions complied with existing public service regulations and transition directives.
Principles of Fairness and Objectivity
According to the Minister, the committee’s work was guided by principles of fairness and objectivity, with the sole aim of protecting the public interest. Where breaches were identified, recommendations were made for revocation, not as punishment, but as a corrective measure to restore procedural integrity.
He emphasized that upholding due process is essential for maintaining confidence in public institutions. Allowing appointments that do not follow established rules to stand, he said, would undermine professionalism within the public service and weaken respect for lawful governance.
The Minister also assured affected individuals and the wider public that government remains committed to transparency and accountability. He indicated that questions and concerns regarding the revocation process are welcome and would be addressed through appropriate channels to ensure clarity and fairness.
By taking this step, the government believes it is reinforcing the principle that public office appointments must always be guided by law, not political convenience. The revocation, he concluded, reflects a broader commitment to good governance and the consistent application of rules, regardless of the political context.
READ ALSO: Government Delivers Outboard Motors to Pirate Attack Victims
