The election of Kojo Fosu Boadu, popularly known as Kojo Bamba, as First National Vice Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) has triggered a debate over whether his previous conviction affects his eligibility to hold the position.
Kojo Bamba emerged victorious at the NPP’s National Delegates Conference in Kumasi on October 3, 2026, securing 3,116 votes. He defeated Henry Nana Boakye, who obtained 3,061 votes, and Nana Akomea, who polled 2,987 votes.
The controversy stems from a 2017 case involving members of the Delta Force, a group associated with the NPP. Kojo Bamba was among those convicted after pleading guilty to escaping from lawful custody and was subsequently fined.
Akwatia Member of Parliament Bernard Bediako Baidoo has questioned how Kojo Bamba was cleared to contest the election, arguing that the NPP’s constitution contains provisions governing the eligibility of members seeking party positions.
The MP has pointed to provisions of the NPP Constitution concerning members who have been convicted of certain offences, arguing that the issue should have been considered during the vetting process.
However, legal practitioner and public affairs commentator Austin Kwabena Brako-Powers has offered a different interpretation of the matter.
According to Brako-Powers, a previous conviction does not automatically disqualify an individual from contesting an internal political party election. He said the critical issue is the specific offence for which the person was convicted and whether it falls within a category that attracts disqualification.
He explained that Article 94(2)(c) of the 1992 Constitution sets out circumstances under which a person may be disqualified from being elected as President or a Member of Parliament because of a previous conviction.
Brako-Powers said those constitutional provisions should not automatically be applied to internal elections within a political party. Instead, the NPP’s own constitution and its eligibility requirements would have to be examined to determine whether Kojo Bamba’s conviction prevents him from holding the position.
He further argued that the offence for which Kojo Bamba was convicted did not fall within the categories of offences that would trigger the constitutional disqualification being cited by his critics.
The legal debate therefore centres on the distinction between eligibility for public office under the national Constitution and eligibility for an internal position within a political party.
For Kojo Bamba’s election to be annulled on eligibility grounds, there would need to be a determination that his candidacy or election breached the applicable provisions of the NPP Constitution or another binding legal requirement.
At present, the competing arguments have focused largely on how the party’s constitution should be interpreted in relation to his previous conviction. While some NPP figures and commentators have questioned the decision to allow him to contest, Brako-Powers maintains that the conviction, by itself, does not provide sufficient legal grounds to invalidate his election.
Kojo Bamba has meanwhile called for unity within the party following the national executive elections, saying the contest is over and that members should now work together toward strengthening the NPP.
The issue is therefore likely to remain a subject of discussion within the party unless the relevant NPP authorities or a competent legal forum provides a definitive interpretation of the applicable eligibility provisions.
Source: Thepressradio.com
