Ghana is worse off under the NDC government - Richard Ahiagbah

A fresh political storm is brewing in Ghana’s already charged landscape as Richard Ahiagbah, Communications Director of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), launches a blistering critique of the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC), insisting that life has deteriorated for ordinary citizens since the party assumed power.

In a strongly worded statement shared on social media, Ahiagbah argued that the NDC secured victory in the 2024 general elections through what he described as “misleading narratives and unrealistic promises.” 

According to him, the gap between campaign assurances and current realities has become increasingly evident to Ghanaians struggling with economic pressures.

Central to his criticism is the claim that the NDC misrepresented the condition of the presidential jet while in opposition. 

Ahiagbah contends that assurances given at the time—that the aircraft was in pristine condition—have now been contradicted by the government’s actions. 

He argues that this inconsistency raises serious concerns about transparency and credibility in governance.

The NPP spokesperson also took aim at the administration’s flagship economic ideas, particularly the much-publicised 24-hour economy policy. 

He claimed that the initiative has yet to translate into tangible opportunities, especially for young people who continue to face unemployment and economic hardship under the leadership of John Dramani Mahama.

Beyond policy concerns, Ahiagbah accused the government of prioritising media control over measurable achievements. 

In his view, the administration has focused more on shaping public perception than delivering concrete results. 

“The government cannot point to any major achievement,” he suggested, adding that sectors such as agriculture—especially cocoa farming—are experiencing growing strain.

Another controversial issue raised by Ahiagbah is the President’s use of a private jet owned by his brother, Ibrahim Mahama. 

He described the arrangement as a “clear conflict of interest,” arguing that it blurs the line between private relationships and public responsibility. 

According to him, such decisions risk undermining public trust and contradict the ethical standards expected of public officeholders.

His comments echo broader concerns raised by civil society voices, including Franklin Cudjoe, who has also questioned the lack of economic justification for the travel arrangement.