NPP has always chosen flagbearers based on seniority

Former Member of Parliament (MP) for the Obuasi Constituency, Edward Ennin says the New Patriotic Party (NPP) has an unwritten succession plan which sees the contender or second runner up of the last flagbearership race being the favorite to lead the party in the next election.

Adding seniority was also a determinant, he noted, “That’s the tradition of the NPP. There has always been the succession plan for the flagbearer where the one who contested the last leader automatically leads the party. Kufuor couldn’t be flagbearer before Adu Boahen because he was senior to Kufuor. Nana Addo couldn’t go ahead of Kufuor because he (Kufuor) was senior to Nana Addo. It has always been a matter of seniority in the party.”

Addressing a Facebook post made by Dr Gideon Boako, the Economic Advisor and Spokesperson to Vice President Dr Mahamudu Bawumia, on the party’s flagbearship race in which the former claimed Alan Kyeremanten had no right to lead the party in 2024, Edward Ennin who is an NPP conservative said there was no way he would ever support the Vice President’s flagbearership bid.

“In terms of seniority, Alan Kyeremanten has been with the party since its inception but the Vice President was seen in 2008 and I think even his party card will tell you he joined the NPP in 2008. I have been in the party since 1992 and as a conservative I will not support Dr. Bawumia if you ask me to.”

In an interview with Sefah-Danquah on Happy98.9FM’s Epa Hoa Daben political talk show, he indicated Alan Kyeremanten is performing his duties diligently as the Trades Minister. “His work speaks for itself and he is senior to Bawumia so I don’t understand why people are acting and hating on Alan at this time.”

In a Facebook post slighting Alan Kyeremanten and his bid to bear the flag for the NPP in the 2024 election, Dr. Gideon Boako wrote;

So I go into a contest with you. I get more votes than you but not sufficient enough to secure me the required 50% plus 1. You came next to me and instead of a second round contest you concede to me. That’s nice. I acknowledge you in my acceptance speech and in order to ensure greater unity I indicate that you will come after me. Few months later you decided to abandon me and the team to fight our own fight on a flimsy excuse. Fair enough you rescind your decision and join us. We heartily accept you back. I go into the main contest but unfortunately lost.

Instead of keeping to the commitment of conceding to me to go again so you can come after you contest me. I lost and decided to go again and there again you did not concede to me but contested me.

Once you do this you have withdrawn the commitment you made to me. Should the assurance I gave you still hold even after you subsequently withdrew your commitment to me on two separate occasions? Once you withdrew your commitment the consequential assurance from me also stands withdrawn.

With this, any desperate and awkward attempt to create a false impression that an assurance for which tenets you have grossly violated still holds can only be laughable.