A new Global InfoAnalytics survey has exposed deep public skepticism toward Ghana’s parliamentary vetting process, with 77% of citizens accusing the Appointments Committee of prioritizing political theatrics over genuine scrutiny of presidential nominees.
The poll, conducted from January 30 to February 1, 2025, paints a picture of a nation increasingly disillusioned with parliamentary conduct, even as President John Mahama’s cabinet choices enjoy overwhelming approval.
The findings reveal a stark contradiction: while 63% of respondents broadly approve of the committee’s work, only 28% say they are “very” or “extremely satisfied.” A significant 37% openly disapprove, reflecting frustration with the body’s perceived bias and dysfunction. These sentiments have been amplified by recent chaotic scenes during vetting sessions, including physical clashes between lawmakers and the destruction of public property. Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin denounced the behavior as “disgraceful,” later appointing a special committee to investigate the incidents—a move supported by 79% of Ghanaians.
Public reactions to key figures on the committee further underscore the crisis. Chairman Bernard Ahiafor, a member of the governing National Democratic Congress (NDC), holds a modest 56% approval rating, but 44% disapprove of his leadership—including 19% who are “not satisfied at all.” Opposition Ranking Member Alexander Afenyo-Markin of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) faces even sharper criticism, with 64% disapproving of his performance and 44% expressing outright dissatisfaction. Analysts suggest the NPP’s aggressive tactics during hearings, often framed as attempts to undermine Mahama’s agenda, have backfired with voters.
Despite the turmoil, public interest remains remarkably high, with 88% of Ghanaians closely tracking the committee’s work. This engagement highlights a paradox: citizens value transparent governance but feel increasingly alienated by partisan grandstanding. “People want rigorous vetting, not political boxing matches,” said Accra-based governance expert Nana Ama Boateng. “When lawmakers brawl instead of asking tough questions about nominees’ qualifications, it erodes trust in the entire system.”
The disconnect between Mahama’s popular appointees (90% approval) and the contentious vetting process has become a focal point. Many argue that the committee’s antics distract from substantive debates about the government’s policy direction. “The president is picking competent people, but parliament is stuck in playground politics,” remarked taxi driver Kwame Osei, echoing a common sentiment.
The poll’s results arrive at a critical juncture for Ghana’s democracy. With public faith in oversight mechanisms wavering, pressure is mounting on Speaker Bagbin to enforce stricter disciplinary measures and reform vetting protocols. Political scientist Dr. Esi Coleman warns that failure to address these issues could have lasting consequences: “When citizens see parliament as a stage for clowns rather than a check on power, it undermines accountability. This isn’t just about one committee—it’s about whether Ghana’s institutions can function amid polarization.”
For now, the data offers both a warning and a roadmap. Ghanaians clearly value robust parliamentary oversight but demand dignity and purpose in the process. As the nation watches the special committee’s investigation unfold, the question remains: Can its leaders rise above partisan rancor to restore integrity to one of democracy’s most vital functions? The answer may define Ghana’s governance trajectory for years to come.
Methodology: The Global InfoAnalytics survey sampled 952 respondents through online and field interviews, with a margin of error of ±3.20% at a 95% confidence level
