Legal practitioner and political analyst, Austin Kwabena Brako-Powers, has weighed in on the controversy surrounding alleged vote-buying during an internal party election in the Ayawaso East Constituency, stating that while the practice is reprehensible, it is not criminal under Ghanaian law when it occurs within a political party’s internal processes.
The incident, which took place over the weekend, sparked public outrage and widespread debate on social media, with many Ghanaians questioning whether such acts amount to criminal conduct and why similar incidents continue to recur in Ghana’s political landscape.
According to Mr Brako-Powers, the public anger is not necessarily because the act is unprecedented, but rather due to the scale of the alleged vote-buying and the optics it creates. “The law is clear,” he noted, “vote-buying is not illegal when it occurs in an internal party contest. It only becomes a crime when it takes place during a public or national election.”
He described the alleged conduct as morally unacceptable but legally distinct from criminal vote-buying, stressing that perception often matters more than technical legality in a politically sensitive environment. “It is reprehensible but not illegal,” he said.
Allegations have emerged that Ghana’s High Commissioner to Nigeria, Baba Jamal, and his main contender, Hajia Amina Adams, both allegedly distributed items to delegates during the contest. Mr Brako-Powers cautioned that these remain allegations and must be properly investigated before any definitive conclusions are drawn.
He further explained that despite their public-facing nature, political parties cannot be equated to public institutions in the strict legal sense. Institutions such as the Electoral Commission, the National Development Planning Commission (NDPC), and the Office of the Attorney-General, he said, are fundamentally different from political parties in law.
Citing Section 256 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29), as amended by Act 1034, Mr Brako-Powers pointed out that the offence of corruption, intimidation, or personation applies strictly to public elections. Under the law, persons found guilty of such offences face prison terms of between five and ten years and are barred from holding public office related to the election.
He also referenced Sections 18, 19, and 20 of the Representation of the People Law, 1992 (PNDCL 284), which provide that bribery or vote-buying can serve as grounds for invalidating the results of a public election.
However, Mr Brako-Powers emphasised that none of these statutory provisions directly regulates or criminalises conduct during internal party elections, leaving a legal gap in the regulation of such processes.
He observed that even the Political Parties Act, 2000 (Act 574), which ideally should have addressed internal party conduct more comprehensively, is silent on vote-buying within party primaries and internal contests.
Despite this gap, Mr Brako-Powers noted that political parties are not without responsibility. He cited Article 55(5) of the 1992 Constitution, which mandates political parties to ensure that their internal organisation conforms to democratic principles and does not contravene the Constitution or any other law.
He concluded that while internal vote-buying may not currently attract criminal sanctions, political parties have a constitutional and moral duty to clamp down on such practices, warning that failure to do so undermines public trust, weakens democratic culture, and fuels the perception that corruption is tolerated within the political system.
