The New Patriotic Party (NPP) has defended its handling of the recent disciplinary hearing involving Member of Parliament for Dome-Kwabenya, Hon. Sarah Adwoa Safo, amid criticism following her unexpected appearance at party headquarters for a meeting that did not take place.

Deputy General Secretary of the party, Haruna Mohammed, maintains that Adwoa Safo and her legal representatives were duly notified of the postponement.

Speaking to the matter, Haruna Mohammed addressed the confusion that unfolded at the party’s national headquarters.

“The committee again communicated to Honorable Adwoa Safo yesterday… They sent this electronically to her and then got an electronic response from her lawyer who confirmed receipt of this particular postponement”
Haruna Mohammed, Deputy General Secretary, NPP

According to Mohammed, the committee acted independently after receiving a referral from the General Secretary, who also happens to be the complainant in the case against the Dome-Kwabenya legislator.

The committee, he explained, followed its internal protocols for arranging the hearing, including prior consultation with Safo’s team before setting the original date.

Despite the formal postponement, Hon. Safo appeared at the party’s offices on the originally scheduled date, reportedly expecting the hearing to proceed.

The development led to widespread speculation and confusion, raising questions about procedural missteps and internal miscommunication.

In his account, Mohammed narrated how he was asked by the General Secretary to step out of a meeting after Safo’s arrival caused a stir.

He then personally approached the MP to reiterate the information already shared electronically.

NPP Logo

“I went in the company of one person. We went into her car to remind her of the information we have at the headquarters based on a letter that the committee had issued”
Haruna Mohammed, Deputy General Secretary, NPP

He added that Hon. Safo insisted she had not seen the notice, prompting him to direct her to the channels through which the message had been dispatched, including copies sent to her lawyer and aide.

Procedural Clarity or Internal Missteps?

The episode has sparked debate within political circles about the communication protocols employed by the NPP in dealing with internal disciplinary matters.

While the party’s leadership asserts that all due procedures were followed, questions persist over how an MP of Safo’s stature ended up uninformed about a crucial change in schedule, especially when the stakes surrounding her case remain high.

Haruna Mohammed was quick to clarify that no preparations had been made at the party’s headquarters for the committee to convene.

“We never expected to see Honorable Adwoa Safo in the office because the committee had informed the national party headquarters and nobody had made any preparations for their sitting”
Haruna Mohammed, Deputy General Secretary, NPP

He emphasized that whenever the Disciplinary Committee plans to convene, there are specific arrangements including technical set-ups to accommodate recordings and documentation.

None of those preparations had been made, further supporting the party’s claim that the session was indeed postponed.

The controversy comes at a sensitive time for the NPP, as internal discipline and party cohesion have become more critical than ever with the 2024 electoral aftermath still fresh.

The party, currently in opposition, faces the delicate task of managing its internal affairs without triggering unnecessary public backlash.

The former Member of Parliament for Dome-Kwabenya, Sarah Adwoa Safo, was summoned to appear before the NPP Disciplinary Committee following public criticisms she made against the party’s leadership.

Her remarks, which were disseminated through various media channels, accused the party of mistreatment during her tenure and offered her perspective on the NPP’s loss of the Dome-Kwabenya parliamentary seat in the last general elections.

Party insiders indicated that her actions might have breached the NPP’s code of conduct, prompting the Disciplinary Committee to seek an explanation and consider potential sanctions.

Especially when they were in violation of an official party directive for all party members to refrain from granting public interviews and speaking on internal party matters.

While the specific allegations or complaints against Hon. Safo have not been made public in detail, her recent history of absences and political friction has kept her at the centre of intra-party scrutiny.

The latest development is unlikely to quell speculation about tensions within the party’s ranks.

For now, the party insists that its structures are intact and functioning. Whether Hon. Safo returns for the next rescheduled hearing, remains to be seen.