Professor Kwaku Asare, a prominent legal scholar and governance expert, has strongly urged Ghana to establish more robust public institutions that guarantee equal access to opportunities for all citizens. He contends that individuals should not need to rely on personal relationships with politicians to secure essential services or advantages.
This call for institutional strengthening follows recent comments by retired Supreme Court Justice William Atuguba. Justice Atuguba criticized politicians for engaging closely with constituents during election campaigns but then becoming inaccessible after winning office. Professor Asare, however, argues that the problem goes deeper than unanswered calls, pointing to a fundamental structural weakness within Ghana's governance framework.
Ghana's institutions have become overly dependent on personal influence, leading many citizens to believe that success is more about political connections than individual merit. This systemic issue affects various aspects of public life. These include admissions to educational institutions, employment opportunities, scholarships, public contracts, appointments, transfers, promotions, land allocation, and even basic public services.
Professor Asare articulated this concern in a Facebook opinion piece published on Saturday, July 18. He stated, "It is that our system of governance encourages people to believe that personal access to politicians is necessary for navigating public life." He added that "Too much in our beloved country appears to depend on whom one knows."
This culture, he explained, creates fertile ground for cronyism and nepotism, which he terms "Familiar Family and Friends Governance." When access to opportunities relies on political relationships, citizens naturally invest heavily in cultivating these connections. They then feel disappointed and betrayed when politicians become inaccessible after assuming office, as Justice Atuguba observed.
Professor Asare, however, acknowledges the impracticality of elected officials maintaining personal relationships with every supporter. He noted, "No politician can remain personally close to everyone who supported, advised, defended or befriended them during an election." He stressed that campaign coalitions are broad, while government is narrower, leading to new pressures and changing priorities.
Instead, he advocates for a shift in focus towards strengthening institutions. This would ensure that access to public opportunities is determined by transparent rules and merit, rather than personal influence. "We must therefore stop asking politicians to maintain permanent personal relationships with everyone who helped them and start building institutions that make those relationships largely irrelevant," he urged.
He emphasized that citizens should not require political patrons to secure employment or contracts. A student should not need an influential relative to gain school admission. A public officer should not need a political patron for a promotion. He recalled past practices, such as publicly published university admissions based on A-Level examinations, as examples of systems that projected fairness through merit.
Professor Asare called for a return to governance based on transparent criteria, competitive processes, published outcomes, auditable decisions, and effective appeal mechanisms. The ultimate objective, he concluded, should be a "non-connection state." In such a state, rules would outperform relationships, merit would defeat patronage, and institutions would deliver what citizens currently seek through personal access.
Justice Atuguba's remarks, Professor Asare believes, should spark a broader national conversation about institutional reform. This conversation should focus on strengthening institutions rather than merely discussing political loyalty. He concluded, "The day it no longer matters whether a politician answers your call will be the day our institutions have finally begun to answer theirs."