The dismissal of former Inspector General of Police (IGP) Dr. George Akuffo Dampare has sparked intense debate, with political scientist Dr. George Asekere weighing in on the constitutional implications and broader concerns regarding political influence in security appointments.
In an interview with Vaultz News, Dr. Asekere emphasized that while the President has the constitutional authority to appoint and remove an IGP, the underlying justification remains a point of contention.
“There are various conspiracy theories surrounding this issue. While many outside the police service believe that former IGP Dr. George Akuffo Dampare performed well, a significant number of officers within the service hold a different view. Conversations with rank-and-file police officers across the country suggest dissatisfaction with his leadership.”
Dr. George Asekere
Dr. Asekere revealed that during a recent visit to Tamale, Damongo, and Wa, he encountered multiple police officers who voiced their discontent with Dampare’s leadership.
When he inquired about the reasons behind their dissatisfaction, many pointed to the reduction of roadside duties, an action they claimed had impacted their income.
According to Dr. Asekere, this response suggests that some officers may have been engaged in questionable practices, such as extorting money from drivers, and that Dampare’s strict enforcement of discipline disrupted their illicit operations.
While this could explain their grievances, it does not necessarily justify them.
“Nonetheless, if there are other valid reasons for their concerns that remain undisclosed, they are yet to be substantiated. Ultimately, the President has the power to appoint and dismiss, and Dampare, despite criticism, demonstrated professionalism in his role.
“No leader is perfect—achieving even 80% success is commendable, yet vocal critics can sometimes amplify shortcomings disproportionately.”
Dr. George Asekere
Political Influence Over Key Appointments
Furthermore, Dr. George Asekere highlighted concerns regarding the level of political interference in security appointments, emphasizing that Ghana’s constitutional framework grants the President excessive authority in making such decisions.
He noted that while the President, with access to privileged intelligence, may have deemed a leadership change necessary, the broader issue remains whether security appointments should be protected from undue political influence.
He noted that beyond the police service, the President also holds the power to dismiss key officials such as the Director-General of the Ghana Broadcasting Corporation (GBC), the Governor of the Bank of Ghana, the Auditor-General, and the Electoral Commissioner, a tradition started by the Akufo-Addo administration.
While legally justified, these dismissals often expose the fragility of institutional independence and highlight the need for constitutional reforms.
“Reforming the constitution to reduce executive influence over security and governance institutions is crucial. However, another important factor is the attitude of public servants themselves.
“Many middle-ranking officials within the public sector exhibit strong political affiliations, sometimes even more so than top executives.”
Dr. George Asekere
Accordingly, Dr. Asekere stressed the importance of making public institutions attractive career choices, free from political interference.
He pointed out concerns about political patronage in recruitment, where individuals are reportedly required to pay bribes to secure positions within the security services.
Emphasizing the need for a merit-based system, he argued that appointments should be determined by competence rather than political affiliations.
Additionally, he suggested that reducing the President’s appointing authority could help prevent political interference in security appointments, allowing an IGP to serve professionally without the fear of being replaced due to political transitions.
Some critics argue that security appointments should prioritize competence and institutional stability over political loyalty.
While Dr. Asekere acknowledges this, he contended that a presidential appointment does not automatically imply incompetence or partisanship.
“Within the Ghana Police Service, reaching the ranks of Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCOP), or Commissioner of Police (COP) requires years of demonstrated competence under different administrations. Any COP is qualified to be appointed as IGP, having undergone promotions under various governments.”
Dr. George Asekere
However, he warned against the politicization of senior officers within the security services, using the case of COP Alex Mensah as an example.
COP Mensah was allegedly involved in efforts to undermine the leadership of former IGP Dampare, raising concerns about the influence of political interests in security affairs.
He stressed that the real challenge emerges when individuals entrusted with leadership positions prioritize political affiliations over professional integrity, ultimately compromising the effectiveness and independence of security institutions.
The Case for Structured Terms and Oversight
Dr. George Asekere refuted claims that frequent changes in IGPs undermine national security but admitted that they do impact institutional stability.
He noted that Ghana’s security appointments were traditionally based on seniority, a practice that has gradually changed.
To restore stability, he suggested implementing a structured system where IGPs serve fixed terms of three to four years, determined by merit and seniority rather than political influence.
To protect key institutions from excessive partisanship, he proposed policy measures such as bipartisan oversight and independent selection processes.
“One effective approach would be to limit the president’s appointing and dismissal powers. However, even if the president refrains from direct dismissals, government-appointed boards and councils often make such decisions on behalf of the administration.
“The Police Council, for instance, is headed by the Vice President and largely comprises government-aligned members, allowing for indirect political influence.”
Dr. George Asekere
Dr. Asekere suggested that institutional councils should include balanced representation from both the government and the opposition to promote impartial decision-making.
He emphasized that reforms should focus on strengthening professionalism, minimizing political interference, and ensuring that appointments are based on merit.
However, he acknowledged that achieving these goals would require thoughtful planning, strategic policy changes, and a sustained commitment to preserving institutional integrity.
READ ALSO: UK Pushes Forward With Ukraine Peacekeeping Plans
