In the bustling streets of Accra, whispers of election day deals are as common as the honking of car horns. Vote commoditization, the practice of buying and selling votes, has seeped into the fabric of Ghanaian politics, casting a shadow over the democratic process.
This investigation delves into the murky world of vote-buying, exploring how it undermines the integrity of elections and threatens the future of democracy in Ghana.
Since Ghana’s return to multiparty democracy in 1992, elections have been a cornerstone of its political landscape. However, as the stakes of political power have risen, so too has the temptation to influence voters through illicit means. Vote-buying, once a whispered rumor, has now become a prevalent strategy employed by candidates desperate to secure their positions.
Vote commoditization in Ghana takes many forms. On election day, it’s not uncommon to find cash, bags of rice, or even mobile phones being distributed in exchange for votes. Political parties employ intermediaries to navigate local communities, offering incentives to voters in a bid to sway their allegiance. One voter, preferring to remain anonymous, recounts how he received a sewing machine in exchange for his vote: “It’s a common practice here. They know we need these things, and they use it to their advantage.”
“In the recent internal polls of the governing New Patriotic Party (NPP) to elect parliamentary candidates in orphan constituencies – areas where the party has no sitting MPs – delegates openly flaunted wads of cash on camera as monetary incentives, allegedly shared by aspirants to induce votes. Some delegates alleged they received payments as high as GH₵5,000 ($420) each – equivalent to the monthly salary of a medical doctor in Ghana – on voting day to vote for certain aspirants. This means in a constituency where the total number of delegates is 800, a candidate targeting 400 of those would have coughed out $168,000 on the final day of voting to sway the electorate”, according to The Africa Report.
It also stated that, “ then lead presidential contender in the primaries of the main opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) “supported” each of the more than 295,000 delegates with $3.33 ($982,350) as lorry fare “to enable them to travel to the voting centres” during the race. He won by an overwhelming 98.9% of the total votes to lead NDC into election in 2024”.
To add up to the tall list of instigated voting, The Africa report added that, the campaign team of ruling NPP presidential candidate and Vice President Mahamudu Bawumia also confirmed that during the recent NPP presidential primaries, $33.25 was doled out across the board for the over 250,000 delegates, while his main contender Kennedy Agyapong gave each voter $24.94 on voting day, all in the name of “providing transport to the delegates”.
The Representation of the People Act, 1992 (Act 284) explicitly prohibits the practice of vote buying, stating that any person who offers, gives, or receives money or gifts in exchange for votes commits an offence punishable by law. In addition, the Criminal Offenses Act, of 1960 (Act 29) also criminalizes bribery in elections, further clarifying the legal consequences of vote buying.
“ It is not a good gesture for politicians to give people items when election time is approaching. If you want to give out items to the needy or delegates, that could be done without political intentions so it doesn’t seem as buying or bribing them to vote,” Sheila Aduonum, a student of GIJ said. She added that (Act 284 and Act 29) of The Representation of the People Act, 1992 should be enforced to caution both politicians and civilians against vote buying and bribery.
According to Williams Sabbath, a voter and a concerned citizen, certain demographics are more prone to the vote buying process. He said, “ poverty makes people sell their conscience, and integrity and taking a few cedis notes to vote would be a walk in park. Considering their living conditions, it seems their hands are tied and this makes politicians exploit them in the name of gifts”. He described vote buying as an act of disrespect, stating that there is no need to motivate people to vote if you have put in a good work as a politician. He further called on law makers and enforcers to pay attention and nip this canker in the bud.
According to Mileba Godwin Kwame, a law student and a research analyst, vote buying undermines the foundations of democratic governance in Ghana. By distorting electoral outcomes and perpetuating corruption, it undermines accountability, transparency, and representation. Efforts to build strong democratic institutions and promote inclusive governance are hampered by the prevalence of vote buying.
He added that, solving the issue of vote buying requires a comprehensive approach involving legal reforms, enforcement measures, and civic education initiatives. Strengthening anti- corruption laws and electoral regulations is essential to deter vote buying and hold perpetrators accountable. Additionally, promoting transparency in campaign financing and voter education can empower citizens to make informed choices based on principles rather than material incentives.
The impact of vote buying on Ghanaian elections is significant, undermining electoral integrity, political participation, and democratic governance. To safeguard the democratic process and promote inclusive governance, concerted efforts are needed to combat vote buying through legal reforms, enforcement measures, and civic education initiatives. Only by addressing this pervasive challenge can Ghana realize its full democratic potential and advance the interests of all its citizens.
Dorinda Acheampong
UNIMAC-IJ (Faculty of Journalism)
acheampongdorinda@gmail.com