Bawumia’s Team Responds Strongly to Kennedy Agyapong’s Mampong Allegations

Analysis: Kennedy Agyapong’s Claims at Mampong Are Misleading and Harmful to NPP Unity

Kennedy Agyapong’s recent remarks at a political gathering in Mampong have sparked controversy and widespread criticism, particularly among New Patriotic Party (NPP) faithful and political analysts. His statements, widely seen as factually inaccurate and self-serving, are raising concerns about his credibility and commitment to party unity.

At the heart of the controversy is Agyapong’s assertion that former President John Agyekum Kufuor was given a second chance as the NPP’s flagbearer in 1998 because he had only “three to four months” to campaign in the 1996 general elections. This claim, however, is demonstrably false. Historical records show that Kufuor was elected as the NPP’s flagbearer in April 1996—well over eight months before the general election took place in December. Contrary to Agyapong’s version, it was Kufuor’s hard work and strong performance in that election cycle that earned him the support and trust of party delegates in 1998.

If campaign duration were the key reason for re-election as flagbearer, then Prof. Adu Boahen, who had only two months to campaign in 1992, would have been the logical choice in 1996. That was not the case, clearly undermining Kennedy Agyapong’s narrative.

Agyapong also claimed that “Ghanaians say they will vote for the NPP if he is the flagbearer.” This sweeping generalization raises questions. Which Ghanaians said so? Is there data or evidence to back this claim? Political support in Ghana is diverse and multi-faceted, and reducing it to hearsay undermines the intelligence of voters and the complexity of national political dynamics.

Perhaps most troubling is his assertion that the NPP lost the 2024 elections because their candidate, Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, is a Muslim. This suggestion not only sows seeds of religious division but also flies in the face of the facts. Bawumia outperformed over 50 Christian NPP parliamentary candidates in the same election—some of whom are even ordained pastors. If religion had played a decisive role, that would not have been the case.

Furthermore, the Professor Oquaye-led committee, tasked with examining the reasons behind the party’s electoral loss, did not identify religion as a significant factor. Historically, religion has not been a determinant in Ghana’s presidential outcomes. Professor Mills, a Christian, lost elections in both 2000 and 2004. John Mahama lost in 2016. Kufuor lost in 1996, and Akufo-Addo in 2008 and 2012. No one blamed their defeats on their faith.

Agyapong’s own argument collapses under scrutiny. If NPP delegates were against Muslims, how did Bawumia win the 2024 super delegates’ conference and the subsequent primary—defeating multiple Christian contenders, including Agyapong himself? Does Agyapong suggest that the delegates, who chose Bawumia twice, were mostly Muslims? The logic is flawed.

In a contradictory twist, Agyapong also blamed the party’s defeat on President Akufo-Addo’s alleged failure to appoint enough party members into key positions. Which is it—religion or appointments? The inconsistency is hard to ignore.

Moreover, his previous comments labeling NPP members as “foolish” add another layer of contradiction. If he views party members in such a negative light, why is he so eager to lead them?

Agyapong’s elitist remarks at Berekum—where he questioned why “poor people” in the party have opinions—further alienate the grassroots base he needs to win over. Politics is about service to all, not just the wealthy or influential.

While Agyapong called for unity during his speech at Mampong, his divisive rhetoric, misinformation, and attacks on other party leaders suggest otherwise. Unity cannot be built on distortion and insult.

Some say, “Let Ken be Ken,” but if Mampong reflects who Kennedy Agyapong truly is, then the NPP must ask whether this version of Ken serves the party’s best interests.