Ghana's Supreme Court recently abolished the delegate system for electing political party presidential and parliamentary candidates. However, this ruling is unlikely to reduce the significant influence of money in internal party elections, according to Dr. Kofi Takyi Asante, a prominent governance expert.
Dr. Asante, a Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER) at the University of Ghana, stated that while the decision could broaden participation in party primaries, it would not fundamentally alter the financial dynamics that shape internal political contests. He made these observations in an interview with the Ghana News Agency following the Supreme Court's decision on Wednesday, July 29, 2026.
The Supreme Court declared the delegate system unconstitutional, mandating that all registered members in good standing should participate directly in internal elections. This decision followed a constitutional challenge, with the Court asserting that restricting voting rights to selected delegates violated constitutional principles of democratic participation and equality. This move aims to deepen democracy within political parties, a long-standing goal in Ghana's political landscape.
Reacting to the judgment, Dr. Takyi Asante emphasized that the ruling would not address the underlying financial influence in electoral politics. He explained that "liberal democracy is always monetised," highlighting that electoral politics across various democracies are susceptible to the influence of money and powerful financial interests. This perspective suggests that the issue extends beyond Ghana's specific delegate system, reflecting a broader challenge in democratic systems globally.
Dr. Asante further argued that political competition in many democracies is shaped by campaign financing and financial backing. He asserted that "structurally, elections are bought," indicating that merely expanding the voting base in party primaries will not eliminate the influence of money in selecting candidates. This suggests a deeper systemic issue that the court's ruling, while impactful on structure, may not resolve.
The governance expert also questioned whether the ruling would significantly strengthen internal party democracy. He noted that only a small proportion of party supporters are registered, dues-paying members eligible to participate in internal elections. Therefore, while the judgment seeks to democratize candidate selection by allowing all members in good standing to vote, active participation in party politics remains limited. He expressed doubt about the ruling's material impact on election quality, stating, "I see where it’s coming from, but whether it’s going to have any material impact on the quality of elections, I highly doubt it."
Regarding implementation, Dr. Takyi Asante acknowledged that complying with the Court’s decision could present practical challenges for political parties. However, he expressed the view that parties would eventually adapt. He recalled that previous attempts to broaden participation in party primaries had been abandoned due to administrative complexities. Despite the potential for adaptation, he reiterated his skepticism about the ruling's ability to fundamentally change the nature of politics in Ghana or bring about the needed transformation. The ruling will require political parties to amend their constitutions and internal electoral regulations to accommodate broader member participation in future internal elections.