The Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA) has strongly called on Ghana's Electoral Commission (EC) to reconsider its recent decision to limit media access to collation centers during the 2024 elections. This move, which has sparked significant debate among stakeholders, could potentially hinder transparency and undermine public confidence in the electoral process.
In a directive outlined in a memo to its regional directors, the EC specified that only a limited number of media houses would be accredited to cover the collation process at both constituency and regional levels. The restrictions allocate access to eight media houses per constituency collation center. These include three television stations, each with two personnel, and five radio stations, each represented by one journalist. Similarly, at the regional collation centers, the EC plans to permit 12 media houses, with five TV stations having two personnel each and seven radio stations with one representative apiece.
The MFWA, a renowned media advocacy organization, has criticized the directive, arguing that it could impair the media’s role in ensuring accountability and transparency. The foundation insists that broader media access is crucial to maintaining trust in the electoral process and reinforcing democratic principles.
Dr. Bossman Asare, Deputy Chairperson of the Electoral Commission, defended the EC’s decision, explaining that the restrictions aim to create an enabling environment for smooth collation processes. “In the wisdom of the commission, the conclusion was that to create an enabling environment for a smooth collation exercise, let’s restrict the numbers. We think at the constituency level, having eight media houses is generally appropriate, and at the regional level, twelve media houses is very much appropriate,” he stated.
Despite these assurances, critics, including the MFWA, have expressed deep concerns. The organization argues that the restrictive measures could stifle the media’s ability to comprehensively cover the collation process and scrutinize the election results. This, they claim, could lead to a lack of transparency, potentially raising doubts about the credibility of the elections.
In a recent interview, Sulemana Braimah, Executive Director of the MFWA, voiced his disappointment with the EC’s directive. He emphasized the importance of a diverse media presence at collation centers to ensure comprehensive reporting and public trust. “Since when did media coverage become just radio and television? What about newspapers? What about online publications?” Braimah questioned, expressing disbelief at the decision. He further described the move as “misdirected” and urged the EC to reverse it immediately. “As they say, better late than never. This is something that I think should be reversed,” he added.
Braimah’s comments highlight a broader concern about the evolving role of media in elections. In today’s digital age, traditional media platforms like radio and television are no longer the sole sources of information. Online publications and social media platforms have become critical tools for disseminating information quickly and widely. By limiting access to only a select group of media houses, the EC risks sidelining these emerging platforms, which play a vital role in shaping public opinion and fostering inclusivity.
The MFWA also underscored the broader implications of the directive. Restricting media access not only limits transparency but also risks eroding public trust in the electoral process, a cornerstone of democratic governance. The foundation believes that the media serves as a watchdog, ensuring that all aspects of the electoral process, including collation and declaration of results, are conducted fairly and transparently.
The EC’s decision has sparked a larger conversation about the balance between maintaining order at collation centers and ensuring unrestricted media access. While the EC’s intention to prevent overcrowding and maintain a conducive working environment is understandable, many argue that it should not come at the expense of transparency. Stakeholders have called for a more inclusive approach that accommodates various media platforms without compromising the integrity of the collation process.
The upcoming 2024 elections are critical for Ghana, a nation celebrated for its democratic stability in Africa. As political tensions rise and public scrutiny intensifies, the role of the media in fostering transparency and accountability becomes even more crucial. The MFWA’s call to action serves as a timely reminder of the importance of an open and inclusive electoral process, one that upholds the principles of democracy and ensures that every vote counts.
As the debate continues, many hope that the EC will reconsider its position and adopt measures that balance the need for order with the imperative for transparency. The media, as a pillar of democracy, must be allowed to play its role effectively, ensuring that the 2024 elections are not only free and fair but also credible and inclusive.
The MFWA’s appeal is a rallying cry for all stakeholders to prioritize transparency and accountability in the electoral process. In a democracy, trust is paramount, and the media remains a vital conduit for building that trust. By reversing its decision, the EC has an opportunity to demonstrate its commitment to these values and reaffirm its dedication to conducting credible elections.
blogpay
Total Comments: 0