Life, leadership, and governance continually teach profound lessons, prominent among them being that institutions built around individuals are fragile, transient, and vulnerable to collapse, while those constructed upon systems and structures endure, enabling progress that outlives the tenure of any single leader. Societies that fail to internalise this principle risk squandering resources, alienating talent, and perpetuating cycles of inefficiency, regardless of the brilliance, integrity, or vision of their political actors. Ghana provides a compelling case study of this dynamic, as the nation navigates over three decades of constitutional democracy while contending with the consequences of personalised governance, stalled projects, and weakened institutional memory.
Since the inception of the Fourth Republic in 1992, Ghana has been governed by five presidencies across six administrations, including the tenures of President Jerry John Rawlings, President John Agyekum Kufuor, President John Evans Atta Mills, President John Dramani Mahama, and President Nana Akufo Addo, with the repetition of President Mahama’s administration reflecting the cyclical nature of political leadership. This thirty-three-year journey should have produced a public sector characterised by cumulative knowledge, visible institutional growth, and sustainable national programmes.
Yet, in practice, it remains difficult to discern the continuity of strategic direction across ministries and agencies. Each administration often feels compelled to start anew, evaluating inherited programmes with suspicion, discarding what is deemed politically associated with the previous government, and reshaping institutional mandates to reflect immediate electoral priorities rather than enduring national needs.
This pattern of discontinuity has tangible consequences for public servants, whose careers and professional development are shaped by the frameworks within which they operate. Many civil servants enter the service with a profound commitment to national development. They aspire to make meaningful contributions in their chosen fields, cultivate specialised expertise, and see their work bear fruit for citizens. Yet the reality of frequent policy shifts, transfers, and reorganisations often frustrates these ambitions. Officers who have spent years mastering particular sectors may find their skills underutilised when units are repurposed or portfolios reallocated. Career progression becomes unpredictable, and the accumulation of institutional memory erodes with each abrupt transition. Such instability discourages ambitious professionals, eroding motivation and sometimes prompting highly trained technocrats, both within the country and among the diaspora, to pursue opportunities elsewhere.
The consequences of these structural weaknesses are vividly illustrated by the prolonged journey of key policy milestones such as the passage of the Right to Information and Affirmative Action Laws. For decades, Ghana recognised the imperative of legislation that would foster transparency, empower citizens, and promote governmental accountability and ensure inclusion across sectors. The principles underpinning these bills were broadly accepted as necessary for the consolidation of democracy. Yet, they remained ensnared in procedural delays, had to be retabled multiple times, and repeatedly subjected to political negotiation and manoeuvring.
Their enactment was dependent on which administration held power and whether political actors were willing to advance the law, even when it aligned with national interests. As a result, the bills long-awaited passage was only achieved in 2024, after decades of deferred action. This delay represents not merely a legislative failure but a structural deficit in the governance of Ghana: when laws are reliant on personalities rather than embedded systems, essential reforms are postponed at the expense of citizens’ rights and the credibility of the state.
Similar challenges are evident in the realm of infrastructure. Consider the Accra–Kumasi road dualisation, a project that has been promised repeatedly over multiple administrations. The road is a critical artery for commerce, mobility, and national integration, connecting the capital city with the second largest urban centre. Yet, despite successive commitments, the project has remained incomplete, subject to redesign, political rebranding, and administrative delays.
This recurrent cycle illustrates a troubling phenomenon: national priorities are subordinated to political cycles, with each administration seeking to leave its own imprint rather than building upon the work of its predecessor. The promises, ceremonial launches, and phased announcements, while impressive in presentation, mask a deeper structural deficiency: the absence of an institutional framework capable of ensuring that strategic projects are completed regardless of who holds political office.
Perhaps the starkest and humanly poignant example of structural neglect is the forty-seven-year trajectory of the maternity block at Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital. Initiated in 1978, the project was conceived to meet urgent maternal and neonatal health needs. Decades passed, encompassing multiple regimes, political transitions, and shifts in national economic policy, yet the building remained unfinished. Successive administrations made intermittent attempts to advance the project, but the lack of consistent oversight, the frequent reprioritisation of resources, and the influence of political considerations ensured that the work was perpetually deferred.
Over time, the partially constructed building deteriorated, ultimately reaching a state that necessitated demolition. The financial costs of restarting were enormous, but the human cost of deprivation of adequate maternal healthcare for generations of women was incalculable. This case is emblematic of the wider consequences of weak institutional continuity: investments, human lives, and public trust are all placed at risk when systems cannot sustain the momentum of national development.
A recurring factor in these failures is the tendency of governments to discontinue projects initiated by predecessors. This practice is often less about the intrinsic merits of projects and more about political advantage, allowing new administrations to allocate contracts to allies and assert ownership over development achievements.
While some degree of policy recalibration is both natural and necessary, the frequent and wholesale interruption of national programmes reveals a structural pathology: governance in Ghana often prioritises short-term political expediency over long-term societal benefit. The result is not only inefficiency but the perpetuation of a culture of temporary fixes, patronage, and the erasure of institutional memory.
It is at this juncture that institutions like the National Development Planning Commission assume critical importance. Established under Articles 86 and 87 of the 1992 Constitution and formalised through Acts 479 and 480 in 1994, the NDPC is constitutionally mandated to formulate national development plans, coordinate decentralised planning, and advise both the President and Parliament on strategic national priorities. The commission represents a deliberate attempt to institutionalise continuity and to protect long-term planning from the vicissitudes of political cycles.
Yet, while the NDPC has the mandate and the technical capacity to safeguard national priorities, its effectiveness is constrained by factors such as political influence, fluctuating resourcing, and limited operational autonomy. The commission’s potential to anchor Ghanaian governance in continuity is considerable, but unrealised, demonstrating that even the most carefully designed institutional frameworks require active commitment from political leaders and society at large.
If strengthened and restructured for independence, the NDPC could serve as the nation’s primary instrument for ensuring continuity across administrations. It could provide authoritative guidance, monitor the implementation of long-term projects, and offer legally binding national development plans that transcend electoral cycles. Such empowerment would transform development from episodic performance into an enduring trajectory, ensuring that projects such as the Accra–Kumasi road dualisation or the maternity block at Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital are not contingent on the political motivations of particular leaders but are secured within the national governance architecture.
A maturing democracy such as Ghana’s requires that institutions like the NDPC function not only as planning bodies but also as guardians of accountability. They must be insulated from political manipulation, adequately resourced, and granted the authority to enforce continuity. When properly empowered, the NDPC can help prevent scenarios in which critical legislation, such as the Right to Information Bill or the Affirmative Action (Gender Equity) Bill, languishes for decades.
It can provide oversight mechanisms to ensure that infrastructure projects are completed on schedule, funds are utilised efficiently, and national priorities are preserved across successive governments. The potential for such an institution to transform the governance landscape is immense; the failure to fully operationalise it, conversely, represents a costly lost opportunity for national progress.
The structural challenges in Ghana’s public sector extend beyond the NDPC. Addressing these challenges, therefore, requires a comprehensive vision for systemic reform. Ghana must transition from a model of governance that privileges political personalities to one that privileges institutions and long-term planning. Civil service career structures must be redesigned to encourage specialisation, institutional memory, and professional accountability.
Transfers and portfolio reallocations should be conducted strategically, ensuring that expertise is retained where it is most impactful. National development planning must be insulated from electoral cycles, protected by statutory frameworks that bind each administration to prior commitments. Legislative and procedural reforms must ensure that long-pending bills are prioritised and expedited. Public procurement processes must be made transparent, and mechanisms must be established to prevent political interference from undermining ongoing projects.
The cultivation of a culture that values systemic continuity is as important as the formal institutions themselves. Citizens must recognise their role as active stewards of governance, demanding accountability, continuity, and evidence-based decision making from elected leaders. Political actors must be encouraged, and where necessary compelled, to align their actions with the long-term interests of the nation, rather than short-term electoral gain. Such cultural alignment ensures that institutional reforms are not merely theoretical, but practical and sustainable, embedded in the expectations and behaviours of the citizenry.
The long-term benefits of such a transformation are profound. A public sector grounded in strong systems and structures allows citizens to trust in the reliability of governance. It enables the completion of critical infrastructure, ensures consistent access to social services, and fosters confidence among investors, civil society, and technocrats alike. Ghana can shift from episodic progress to sustained development, creating a trajectory that is resilient, predictable, and inclusive. The lessons of delayed projects, stalled legislation, and abandoned initiatives would no longer serve as cautionary tales, but as catalysts for reform.
Ultimately, the architecture of continuity requires a disciplined commitment to the principle that nations thrive when institutions, not individuals, are the primary custodians of progress. Leadership should be evaluated not by the number of projects announced, but by the enduring strength of the systems left behind. It is time institutions such as the NDPC, the NCCE, and specialised agencies were revitalised, depoliticised, and adequately resourced to fulfil their mandates. Civil servants must be empowered to preserve institutional memory and to cultivate expertise without fear that their work will be disrupted by political change.
The lesson is unequivocal: do not build a nation around individuals. Build a nation on structures, systems, and continuity. Build institutions that outlast electoral cycles, projects that survive administrations, and laws that are enforced regardless of political expedience. Build a Ghana in which progress is measured not by temporary accolades, but by the enduring improvement in the lives of citizens, the strength of public infrastructure, and the integrity of governance itself. Only by embracing this philosophy can Ghana rise above the constraints of fragmented, personality-driven governance and secure a future worthy of its people, its potential, and its place in the modern world.
It is essential for the nation to move beyond episodic governance, to create an architecture of continuity, and to build a public sector capable of sustaining development across generations. In doing so, Ghana has the opportunity to demonstrate that democracies do not falter because of human imperfection. They falter when structures are weak, systems are inconsistent, and institutional memory is disregarded. Embedding continuity into the core of public service, empowering the NDPC and other strategic institutions, and cultivating a civic culture that values accountability, would ensure that the public sector becomes a vehicle for sustainable, inclusive, and resilient development.
This is the challenge, the opportunity, and the imperative of our time. Ghana must rise to it.
About the Writer
Gifty Nti Konadu, is a governance and policy analyst with extensive experience in public service, national policy formulation, and institutional evaluation. Through her work, she engages deeply with issues of public sector reform, continuity in governance, and the strengthening of national institutions. Her writing combines practical insight from her professional experience with reflective analysis, highlighting the importance of systems and structures over personalities in achieving sustainable development. Gifty is committed to inspiring citizens, technocrats, and public servants alike to prioritise continuity, accountability, and strategic planning in the pursuit of a resilient and thriving nation.
- President Commissions 36.5 Million Dollars Hospital In The Tain District
- You Will Not Go Free For Killing An Hard Working MP – Akufo-Addo To MP’s Killer
- I Will Lead You To Victory – Ato Forson Assures NDC Supporters
Visit Our Social Media for More
About Author
