The Government Director of the Ghana Middle for Democratic Improvement (CDD-Ghana) has expressed concern in regards to the Ghanaian Minister of State Award for Excellence.
Professor H. Kwasi Prempeh warned that such recognition may undermine cupboard cohesion and complicate the president’s administration of the cupboard.
His feedback got here amid a heated debate over the award system, sparking criticism from some sections of the general public and prompting a response from the president.
The awards have been sponsored by Large Occasion Ghana and aimed toward recognizing the excellent achievements of ministers. However critics have questioned each the timing and the appropriateness of rating ministers beneath the identical administration.
Talking on Pleasure Information’ PM Specific Enterprise Version on Monday, Professor Prempeh stated one of many greatest issues was the affect these awards would have on presidential decision-making.
He stated a 3rd get together’s public declaration of the “greatest minister” can create issues if the president is concurrently evaluating that minister’s efficiency in opposition to inner authorities benchmarks.
“For instance, assuming the president is maybe contemplating a reshuffle, on the eve of that call an award will probably be given to appoint a specific minister as Minister of the Yr,” he stated.
He identified that such ministers may even be eliminated based mostly on an analysis recognized solely to the president.
“Then again, that minister may very effectively have been on the president’s reduce block based mostly on the president’s personal inner requirements, benchmarks, and so forth.,” he stated.
“Maybe this minister goes to be given the ax, however swiftly a personal get together or some third get together is selling this individual as, of their view, the most effective minister.”
Professor Prempeh argued that this might impede the president’s capacity to manage personnel selections inside the authorities.
“This complicates selections for the president, similar to managing personnel, managing presidential personnel, and who to maneuver from place to put,” he stated.
Past the affect on particular person ministers, governance specialists expressed issues in regards to the affect on cupboard cohesion and collective duty.
He confused that though ministers are appointed to totally different portfolios, they in the end work in the direction of a typical mission beneath the president.
“Ministers, despite the fact that they’re appointed to a selected position and assigned a selected position, collectively perform a mission that originates from and ends with the president,” he defined.
He stated the precept of collective duty requires ministers to work as a staff somewhat than competing with one another for particular person approval.
“There’s a idea of collective duty, a way that ministers should work collectively as a staff to hold out the orders of the chief department, the president.”
Professor Prempeh warned that awards that single out particular person ministers risked creating incentives for self-promotion somewhat than cooperation.
“For this to truly achieve success, there must be a sure ingredient of teamwork. And whenever you begin giving these perverse incentives, the place one minister or one other minister pursues a single challenge for private glory, you possibly can undermine the teamwork that’s on the foundation of this precept of collective duty.”
He argued that the award may have unintended penalties at each the person and collective ranges of presidency.
“I feel these kinds of awards have the improper incentives and might undermine a president’s capacity to correctly handle a staff.”
Professor Prempeh acknowledged that public demand for efficiency value determinations may create scope for such initiatives, however argued that the broader governance implications shouldn’t be ignored.
