IMANI Africa has raised urgent concerns over the increasing role of money in Ghana’s elections, warning that the financialisation of polling stations risks undermining the very foundations of the country’s democracy.
In its latest critical analysis, the policy think tank outlined how the circulation of money, mandates, and material resources has converted polling stations into economic units, with political parties spending extraordinary sums to influence outcomes.
“‘Elections are won or lost at the polling stations’ has become a blunt axiom that has lodged itself in Ghana’s political imagination. The phrase captures more than factual truth; it names a practical economy. Behind every vote cast at the nation’s roughly 41,000 polling stations lies a dense circuitry of money, matériel and mandate”
IMANI Africa
IMANI’s report highlighted how campaign strategists treat polling stations as individual budget lines. Even modest allocations of GHS 5,000 per station for logistics and refreshments can balloon into hundreds of millions when multiplied across the country’s total polling stations.
If the money extends to direct inducements, the figures skyrocket further. A payout of GHS 50 to 700 voters at a single station translates into GHS 35,000. Scaled nationally, such inducements could surpass a billion cedis in a single election day.
This arithmetic, IMANI noted, creates an entrenched calendar of expectations: from envelopes to be distributed, motorbikes to be hired, meals to be served, and voters to be transported. The organisation warned that such expectations mean the true cost of elections is not captured solely by headline issues like filing fees or party levies, but by the financial pipelines feeding directly into polling stations.
According to IMANI, three major streams sustain this system: “wealthy donors underwriting national campaigns, party structures recycling money raised through levies and filing fees, and small contributions from members and diaspora groups.”
The form of transfer is as important as the source. Institutional transfers leave a paper trail, while bulk cash deliveries to station executives obscure accountability. Even mobile money, while more traceable, can be routed through third parties to disguise beneficiaries.
IMANI noted that the opacity is greatest where cash dominates. With thousands of small but significant transactions unfolding on election day, oversight mechanisms struggle to keep track. The think tank argued that such a structure allows national campaign sums to dissipate in ways that are difficult, if not impossible, to audit.
Payments Beyond Logistics
Yet polling-station spending is not limited to voter inducements. IMANI identified multiple categories like logistics for venues, refreshments, transport, feeding and paying local agents, mobilising youth, and hiring vehicles.
Additionally, there is what the organisation calls “treating” – food, drinks, and tokens provided to delegates and community members – which straddles the line between cultural hospitality and outright inducement.
Direct payments to voters occupy a controversial middle ground. Often rationalised as “transport reimbursements” or “support for vulnerable voters,” they blur the boundary between facilitation and illegality. IMANI cautioned that while recipients may view these envelopes as immediate benefits, the system as a whole becomes distorted by a culture of expectation that weakens the principle of free choice.
The group also noted how high filing and nomination fees exacerbate the problem. In the current New Patriotic Party (NPP) contest, the controversial GHS 4,000,000 development levy has become a prominent example. IMANI’s analysis indicated that such fees act as gatekeepers, favouring aspirants with access to wealthy patronage networks.
Women, youth, and less affluent candidates are systematically disadvantaged, facing dual obstacles of raising upfront capital and meeting ongoing polling-station costs.
This narrows the pool of viable candidates and reinforces a politics shaped more by liquidity than by ideas or representation. According to IMANI, the effect is a vicious cycle: financial barriers limit inclusivity while perpetuating dependence on wealthy backers, whose interests often skew governance priorities.
While Ghana has laws under the Political Parties Act and Electoral Commission regulations, IMANI warned that enforcement has been woefully inadequate. Receipts, bank transfers, and disclosure requirements exist in theory but collapse in practice under the weight of last-minute cash mobilisation.
Oversight agencies often lack the resources to monitor transactions across thousands of polling stations, and evidence dissipates in the heat of election day. The absence of effective enforcement, IMANI argued, has created a governance vacuum in which money quietly dominates the electoral process.
Risks and Reform Pathways
The think tank stressed that the long-term implications of this political economy are severe. Politicians who mobilise huge sums to win office face pressure to recoup their expenditures, often through procurement manipulation, donor favouritism, or selective service delivery.
Patronage, rising costs, and opacity become institutionalised, feeding into corruption and weakening democratic accountability.
In response, IMANI proposed reforms combining “law, technology, and civic oversight.” These include enforceable caps on filing fees, mandatory itemised disclosure of expenses, per-station allowances routed through digital systems, and criminalisation of direct inducements.
The organisation further highlighted the role of civil society and technology in creating transparency, calling for crowdsourced monitoring, mobile-money-only support systems, and public databases of party finances.
However, IMANI insisted that none of these solutions will succeed without strong political will. Technology can only be as honest as those using it, and legal provisions are meaningless without enforcement. To safeguard Ghana’s democracy, the country must equip oversight bodies with independence and capacity, while ensuring citizens and watchdogs can hold political actors accountable.
IMANI concluded that while elections may indeed be won or lost at polling stations, they need not be bought there. The challenge is to secure mandates rooted in consent rather than cash, and to ensure that the cost of Ghana’s democracy does not become its undoing.
READ ALSO: No Ghanaian Left Behind: BoG Pushes Digital Financial Literacy for All
