Not long after the Ghanaian government revoked public sector appointments and promotions made by the previous administration in its final days in office, questions are rife about the economic implications of both actions. The appointments, widely seen as last-minute political decisions, and their subsequent revocation have left a mixed legacy, with their attendant implications for public sector efficiency, fiscal discipline, and broader investor confidence.
The revocation of public sector appointments following a change in government has become a contentious tradition, rooted in partisan politics with concerns about lack of transparency and fairness of those actions.
Historically, outgoing administrations have been accused of rushing appointments and promotions in the public sector to secure jobs for loyalists, prompting incoming governments to revoke such appointments to restore perceived balance and transparency
The Appointments: Economic Burden or Strategic Boost?
Undoubtedly, the appointments made by the previous government came at a time when the country was grappling with fiscal challenges, including a ballooning public wage bill. The cost of salaries, allowances, and administrative support for the appointees contributes to increased public sector expenditure, which raise concerns about whether the appointments were financially sustainable or necessary.
Critics have argued that the timing of the appointments suggested political motives with the tendency to eroding public trust in governance processes. In any case, the Chief of Staff in communicating government’s annulment of the appointments cited non-compliance with good governance practices and principles as reasons the action.
The IMF and jobs
Suffice to say, Ghana is under a three-year Extended Credit Facility (ECF) arrangement with the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) . The Fund has stressed the need for fiscal consolidation, which includes measures affecting public sector employment. The programme aims to restore macroeconomic stability and debt sustainability while fostering inclusive growth.
The IMF supports calibrating public sector wages to balance burden-sharing, productivity, and the government’s capacity to pay. This approach seeks to ensure that wage adjustments are sustainable and aligned with fiscal objectives.
The programme advocates for streamlining non-priority expenditures, which may involve reviewing and potentially reducing certain public sector roles and programmes with the intention to create fiscal space for essential services and social protection initiatives
The standard procedure for public sector appointments in Ghana is guided by: The 1992 Constitution of Ghana, which ensures merit-based recruitment through fair and transparent processes, requiring appointments to be made by the President, Public Services
Commission (PSC), or relevant appointing authorities.
Public Services Commission Guidelines, mandating competitive recruitment through public advertisements, shortlisting, interviews, and merit-based selection.
Civil Service Act, 1993 (PNDC Law 327), specifies that public sector employees are career officers, safeguarded from arbitrary dismissal unless there is just cause, such as misconduct or incompetence.
Labour consultant Seth Abloso noted that from the incidence and evidence of back-dating letters and alterations of probation periods, certain persons could be cited for fraudulent conduct, with dire consequence of being restrained from managing companies if Section 177(1) of the Companies Act,2019(ACT 992), “Restraining Fraudulent Persons from managing companies” is to be applied. And those with membership of Professional bodies also risk facing disciplinary proceedings for unethical and unprofessional conduct.
Questions have been raised about whether the recruitment process was transparent and whether it considered vulnerable groups, including Persons with Disabilities (PWDs), in line with Ghana’s legal obligations under the Persons with Disability Act, 2006 (ACT 715).
Regardless, he was optimistic that some individuals went through due processes and merit based procedures to gain employment in the government sector.
“Serious questions arise in all this debate. Were those beneficiaries of the recruitment exercise the best applicants? Were job vacancies and application notifications open or were those persons’ beneficiaries or closed-door processes and considerations.?” He quizzed.
While the government defends the directive as a necessary measure to restore integrity and transparency in public sector recruitment, critics argue that it could be perceived as political retribution. Dr. Richard Fiadomor, President of the Chamber for Local Governance (ChaLoG), supports the move.
“It is the duty of the government to create jobs, but that certainly must not be done hurriedly by an outgoing government at the expense of the incoming administration. I don’t foresee any unions opposing this directive. It is not in the place of unions to support unlawful actions.” He told The High Street Journal.
Dr. Fiadomor was of the view that unions are unlikely to oppose the directive due to its legal basis. However, political analysts caution that if the directive is viewed as politically motivated, it could heighten polarization and erode public trust in the civil service system.
Supporters argue the directive is necessary to restore integrity and accountability in public sector recruitment. However, critics contend that the decision disproportionately impacts livelihoods and could aggravate social inequalities, especially if transparency concerns are not addressed.
For Ghana to stabilize the public sector and minimize economic disruption, strategic measures are required, including transparent and merit-based recruitment reforms to restore public confidence in
government employment practices, economic stimulus packages and job creation initiatives to absorb displaced workers into the private sector, and policy continuity and clear communication to reassure investors and businesses of stable governance practices.
