For years, the New Patriotic Party (NPP) rallied its base around the now-familiar slogan: “We have the men.” It was meant to signal competence, readiness, and a deep bench of educated, qualified, and experienced hands capable of filling government portfolios and delivering results for the nation. During the 2016 campaign season, the slogan served the then-opposition well, drawing a sharp contrast between itself and what it portrayed as the Mahama-led NDC administration’s incompetence—an administration frequently mocked as being filled with “babies with sharp teeth.”
But in 2020, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) made a bold counterstatement of its own. By selecting Professor Naana Jane Opoku-Agyemang as its Vice Presidential candidate, the party signalled to gender advocates and political observers alike that Ghana might finally be entering a phase where gender equity was not an afterthought but a central political commitment. The message was clear: the NDC did not only “have the men”; it had the women, too.
Yet, in 2025, under a Mahama–Naana Jane leadership, the standard for political leadership has shifted dramatically. Competence alone is no longer enough. Voters are demanding something deeper and more consequential: character, values, integrity, and a demonstrated respect for gender justice and the responsible use of power. As the NDC now claims to also have the men (and women), the real question becomes: Which men? And what do these men signify about the party’s priorities and its gender optics?
In recent months, the NDC has showcased as thought-leaders and public-facing champions two men with long-standing, publicly documented histories of sexual misconduct allegations and gender-based controversy: Professor Ransford Gyampo and Kwesi Kyei Darkwah (KKD).
If these two are emblematic of “the men” the party claims to have, then perhaps the slogan needs a rethink; not by the party’s critics, but by the party itself. The problem isn’t just the men; it’s the decision to platform them! Every political party has problematic figures because human beings are flawed. But there is a clear difference between having flawed members and deliberately elevating individuals with troubling histories to positions of intellectual legitimacy, public representation, or moral authority.
Professor Gyampo
Prof. Gyampo has been embroiled in multiple sexual misconduct allegations over the years, including widely reported incidents involving inappropriate advances toward students and a damning BBC investigative documentary that followed the accounts and testimonies of victims. Whether or not these allegations resulted in criminal consequences is not the core issue here. The issue is the pattern, the public record, and the symbolism of lifting a man repeatedly linked to abuses of power in academic spaces and presenting him as a credible moral or political commentator.
KKD
KKD, too, has long carried the weight of a public rape accusation (one that was withdrawn but not forgotten) alongside numerous criticisms regarding misogyny and inappropriate behaviour in media spaces. Again, the legal outcomes are not the point; the public perception, the cultural memory, and the message his elevation sends to women are.
When a political party with millions of women supporters and volunteers chooses to highlight such men, it sends a signal, intentional or not, that gendered misconduct is not disqualifying. That so long as a man is talented, eloquent, or politically useful, the moral questions surrounding him can be brushed aside.
The Intellectual Dishonesty
To claim that “we have the men,” too, while pushing to the forefront men whose reputations raise serious ethical concerns, is intellectually dishonest for several reasons:
- It assumes competence exists in a moral vacuum.
As though a man can be brilliant, but his treatment of women (and women under his direct supervision) is irrelevant to national leadership. - It ignores the existence of highly qualified women.
Ghana is full of brilliant, accomplished, politically astute women. If the NDC truly “has the people,” why are men with problematic histories being centred over women with clean records, demonstrated integrity, and equal expertise? - It suggests these men represent the party’s best thinking.
This calls into question whether the party’s intellectual infrastructure itself is compromised by patriarchal blind spots.
The moral dishonesty is even more disturbing: To position men with documented histories of sexual misconduct allegations as thought leaders is to implicitly excuse, normalise, or minimise the importance of consent, power abuse, and gender justice. It tells survivors in the party (and across Ghana) that their experiences matter less than the political usefulness of powerful men. It tells young women watching political discourse that their safety is negotiable. It tells the country that the party is willing to preach social justice while practising gendered hypocrisy.
The Irony: Elevating Ghana’s First Female Vice President While Undermining the Victory
Perhaps the most perplexing part of the NDC’s recent choices is the contradiction between celebrating a groundbreaking win for gender representation and simultaneously platforming men whose public histories contradict the very principles that such progress symbolises.
Ghana’s first female Vice President represents a historic shift in our national narrative; a moment that signals possibility, inclusivity, and a breaking of ceilings long considered impenetrable. It is the kind of achievement that should mark a turning point for how women are positioned, respected, and protected within national governance. Yet, in almost the same breath, the party has chosen to surround this historic milestone with men whose public records stand in direct opposition to gender equity and safety.
The irony is stark:
- How does a party make history with a female Vice President and then undermine that triumph by elevating men with publicly documented controversies involving sexual misconduct?
- How does a party signal progressive change while reproducing the same old patriarchal playbook behind the scenes?
- How does it claim to uplift women when the faces it pushes forward are men whose presence alone signals that women’s concerns remain secondary?
It is a contradiction that does not simply dilute the symbolic victory of having a woman in the second-highest office; it threatens to make a mockery of it. Because representation without structural respect is merely optics. And optics without safety is merely a strategy.
What This Means for the Party’s Future
The NDC risks alienating a generation of politically conscious Ghanaian women; women who vote, organise, influence, mobilise, and determine electoral outcomes. In 2025 and beyond, no political party can afford to take women’s loyalty for granted. If the NDC wants to truly say it “has the men,” then it must choose men and women whose public records respect the dignity of all Ghanaians, not only the ones with political connections.
Does the NDC have the men? Maybe the real question is: Does the NDC have the courage to prioritise integrity over convenience? Or perhaps a better slogan for the 21st century would be:
“We have the people.”
People of competence. People of integrity.
People whose histories do not undermine the party’s moral standing.
Until then, elevating men with publicly documented histories of sexual misconduct and gendered controversy makes the slogan ring hollow. Because if these are indeed “the men” the party wants to show the nation, then Ghanaian women, and Ghana’s future, deserve better.
–
Author Bio: Dr Efe Plange is an Assistant Professor of Rhetoric and Writing whose scholarship centres on feminist rhetorics, African digital cultural rhetorics, and feminist media literacy, particularly how African/Black women use digital platforms to challenge patriarchal narratives and create empowering counterpublics. She is the founder and director of Plange Media Lab, a culturally responsive communication and media strategy initiative that supports institutions, creators, and brands in advancing inclusive, socially conscious messaging. Beyond academia, Dr Plange is a gender advocate, of the pepper variety, committed to shifting conversations, disrupting patriarchy, and building safer, more equitable worlds for women and girls.