Claim: Social media users have alleged that the New Patriotic Party’s (NPP) Director of Elections manipulated the party’s ballot position during the presidential election balloting process.
Verdict: False. DUBAWA’s analysis revealed that at the time the NPP knew its ballot position, other candidates sitting close to the NPP had not yet opened their ball-like items containing their positions. Additionally, the paper in front of Peter Mac Manu, Head of Electoral Services for Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia’s campaign team, was not the official ballot position paper but rather a paper from an earlier balloting that determined the order in which political parties would select their positions. Furthermore, key political parties, including the National Democratic Congress (NDC), have denied any claims of a ballot position swap.
Full Text
In the lead-up to the general elections, the Electoral Commission (EC) has faced intense scrutiny, with the National Democratic Congress (NDC) raising multiple accusations of alleged irregularities in the voter registration process. Despite this, on Sep. 20, 2024, political parties participated in the balloting process to determine their positions on the ballot paper for the upcoming elections. By the end of the process, the New Patriotic Party (NPP) secured the first spot, while the NDC took the eighth.
However, following the balloting, a claim went viral suggesting that the NPP had swapped its ballot position with another candidate. The claim was supported by a video showing Evans Nimako, the NPP’s Director of Research and Elections, handing a piece of paper to someone seated next to him. This action led Facebook user Alfred Ogbamey to claim that a ballot swap had occurred, questioning the integrity of the EC by stating, “Why can’t one blindly trust anything organized by the EC without monitoring?”
The claim was further amplified when NDC Online and Gyabeng Samuel posted about it on Facebook, which has received over 100,000 views. This has sparked widespread condemnation in the comments section, with users labeling the EC and the NPP as corrupt.
In response to these allegations, DUBAWA launched an investigation to verify the authenticity of the claim.
Verification
First, DUBAWA sought to understand the procedures involved in the ballot-picking process to assess whether any swapping could have occurred. Before the balloting by the various political parties, the Director of Electoral Services at the Electoral Commission (EC), Benjamin Bano-Bioh, outlined a two-stage process. DUBAWA referenced the live feed by Weozor TV, which captured the entire event as published on YouTube.
According to Benjamin Bano-Bioh, the first stage determined the order in which political parties would select their ballot positions, while the second stage was where they officially picked their positions for the election. Mr. Bano-Bioh explained, “This is the first stage. You are picking for the order. The second stage is when you will pick your position on the ballot. If you pick ‘Number One’ in the first stage, it means you will be the first to choose in the second stage. The number you pick in this stage will be your position on the ballot.” This statement can be verified between 45 minutes 13 seconds and 45 minutes 30 seconds of the video.
The process was carried out smoothly, with each party receiving a number that determined the order for the final ballot position selection. In the second stage, the ballot papers were placed in a green polythene bag, and parties chose their positions according to the order established in the first stage. This can be seen from 1 hour 46 minutes onward in the video.
Did the NPP swap its ballot position?
DUBAWA first analyzed the viral video that allegedly showed the NPP swapping its ballot position. To gain a clearer perspective, DUBAWA referred to the full live stream of the event, which was captured by Woezor TV. According to the footage, the NPP’s Director of Elections, Dr. Evans Nimako, opened the round ball-like item containing the paper with the party’s ballot position at 1 hour 49 minutes 20 seconds into the live stream.
After revealing the position, Dr. Nimako immediately passed the paper to the Head of Electoral Services for Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia’s campaign team Peter Mac Manu, who was seated right beside him. Upon receiving it, Mac Manu smiled, and Dr. Nimako stood up, jubilantly holding a book celebrating that the NPP had secured the Number 1 spot on the ballot. This moment matched the exact scenario depicted in the viral video published by Facebook user Alfred Ogbamey, though the angle from behind made it hard to discern the details.
There were additional claims that the NPP swapped positions with Kofi Akpaloo, the flagbearer of the LPG, who was seated next to Peter Mac Manu. However, DUBAWA’s analysis of the video showed that when Dr. Nimako opened the NPP’s ballot item, Kofi Akpaloo had just taken his seat and had not yet opened his ballot item. This evidence confirmed that no swap occurred between the NPP and any other candidate.
Reaction from NDC
It is also important to note that if any such swap had occurred, the NDC would have opposed it and demanded an investigation. However, in response, the NDC’s Director of Elections, Dr. Omane Boamah, refuted the allegations in a Facebook post on Saturday, September 21. He acknowledged the party’s issues with the Electoral Commission but emphasized that they would not engage in baseless accusations for political gain.
“There was no swap of ballots between Kofi Akpaloo and the NPP,” he confirmed.
Conclusion
The claim that the New Patriotic Party (NPP) swapped its ballot position during the presidential election balloting process is false. DUBAWA’s investigation revealed that at the time the NPP discovered its position, other candidates, including Kofi Akpaloo of the LPG, had not yet opened their ballot items. Furthermore, the paper seen in front of Peter Mac Manu, a member of the NPP team, was from an earlier round determining the order of selection, not the final ballot position. Key political parties, including the National Democratic Congress (NDC), have also denied the allegations of any ballot position swapping.
Claim: General Secretary of the New Patriotic Party, John Boadu, has claimed that about 90% of ruling governments lost their incumbency in 2020.
False. Checks by DUBAWA indicate that as many as 30 Presidential elections were held in 2020 globally. Out of these elections, 20 representing 66.6% of winners were candidates from the ruling party.
Full story
General Secretary of the ruling New Patriotic Party, John Boadu, has said that his party is among a few to have been re-elected in presidential elections in the heat of the COVID 19 pandemic.
According to him, about 90 percent of ruling parties suffered defeat in their respective countries when elections were held in the year 2020, the year of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Speaking on Accra-based Peace FM Akan language, the politician said that the re-election of the New Patriotic Party in 2020 was a testament to President Akufo-Addo’s efficient management of the economy in the midst of the pandemic.
“All political parties in the world, almost about 90 percent of them, in the year of COVID, when they contested, they lost it. Look at [Donald] Trump, before COVID did you see the things he was doing? But the management of COVID did not help him and so he lost. Look at Angela Merkel’s party, they lost it. I can cite a lot of examples. The same thing happened in India. [For] Ghana, because of what President Akufo-Addo did, because of his management of the economy, in the year of elections, during COVID, we won our election,” John Boadu said in Akan which has been translated into english..
His claim can be found between minutes 1:22 to 2:22 of a video uploaded on the Despite Media channel on Youtube.
The video, uploaded on April 21, has since attracted over 500 views and a number of comments.
Article 56 of India’s constitution (Page 58) states that “the President shall hold office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office”
This means that India is expected to go to the polls again in 2022 to elect a new President.
In view of this, John Boadu is wrong to cite India among countries where the ruling party lost an election during the year of COVID. The country’s last election was held in 2017, which is about two years before the outbreak of COVID-19.
Again, DUBAWA came across 30 countries, including Ghana, that held elections to elect a leader for their respective governments in 2020.
Relying on reports from credible media organizations, DUBAWA noticed that, like Ghana, 20 countries out of the 30 identified, had the ruling party retaining power.
It cannot, therefore, be said that 90% of incumbent governments lost power in the heat of the global pandemic in 2020.
Conclusion
John Boadu’s claim that as many as 90% of ruling parties across the globe lost in their re-election bid to lead their respective countries is false.
Out of 30 countries where presidential elections were held, DUBAWA confirmed that the ruling party secured re-election victory in 20 of those elections.
Ahead of Ghana’s 2020 elections, concerns of spiraling rise of fake news and its osmotic penetration into public discourse was feared to become the conduit for character assassination, falsehood peddling and publication of dated information already debunked as false. As anticipated, fake news and malicious information were kneaded into the information ecosystem, thus staining and denting information the general public is exposed to on legacy and new media platforms.
Given that elections are about the struggle for power, information shared by political parties are meant, largely, to influence the decision of the electorate to vote in a particular way. Though there are divergent schools of thought on the potential impact of fake news on the behavior of voters (Cantarella, Fraccaroli & Volpe, 2019; Wang, 2020; & Lee, 2020), what is not in doubt is that fake news is perceived by some individuals as a true reflection of reality and they will not bog down to accept views contrary to what they have heard, seen, or read from platforms with which they share similar beliefs and ideologies (Nguyen, 2020). Verification of information by media audiences is often not given priority, thus exposing consumers of information to well-crafted messages intended to distort reality and ultimately misinform a target community. While verification has become somewhat a challenging task for many, fake information continues to fester; feeding on the vulnerability and gullibility of individuals.
Media platforms, particularly social media, have been singled out as the breeding ground for fake news. According Mavridis (2018), fake news about current social or political issues is regularly circulated on social media with tremendous speed and these fake stories are created to misinform or deceive audiences, influence people’s views, push a political agenda or cause confusion and can often be a profitable business for online publishers
In an era where media audiences are not merely observers and readers of information but have become active contributors, content generators and publishers in the news feed (Bell, 2014), there is the expectation, however, that the practice of information verification will be adhered to. This, often, goes awol, giving a window for fake information to sneak in and eventually populate media platforms. The gatekeeping role played in traditional newsroom set-ups has contributed immensely in double-checking of information before media audiences are exposed to it. Editors and proofreaders have and continue to perform that verification role aimed at ensuring that news presented is devoid of misinformation (Born & Edgington, 2017).
Beyond the opportunity presented by online spaces to media users to create and share their own content to their audiences, the fundamental right of individuals to free speech is also bolstered by a medium that seeks to provide the platform for many to express their opinions and contribute to socio-political discussions on national issues. In Ghana, the constitution grants the right to all persons to freely express their opinion (Endert, Moore, & Suuk, 2019) and this right is consistent with other international protocols on freedom of expression (O’Flaherty, 2012) that Ghana has signed on to. In the wake of widespread fake news, majorly on online platforms where media users post, share and re-share information they have, often not verifying its authenticity, many observers are beginning to shudder on the potential implications of fake news on a fledgling democracy like Ghana. How much effort and measures can be put in place to either control or exterminate fake news in this young democracy remains a daunting task for policy makers, especially when such a step may potentially lead to some sort of censorship or an outright blackout of persons or group of persons from exercising their right to free speech?
While it is expected that the exercise of one’s right to free speech is consciously carried out without abuse, much of the evidence (Anderson & Rainie, 2017; Fletcher et al, 2018)) observed on online platforms points to a situation where media users have found social media as an extension of their voices to propagate, intentionally or unintentionally, misleading information that has the propensity to arouse anxiety, create fear and panic and doubts in the minds of the citizenry.
Fake News as a News Industry
Business organisations have products and services they market, primarily, to rake in income and make profit. For media organisations, the product marketed is information. That information must be newsworthy and must have the element of currency, relevance, oddity, prominence, timeliness, proximity, and sometimes accompanied by controversy. The news media, until recently, was basically newspapers, radio and television. Often, the underpinning motivation behind news publication is to inform, educate and entertain (Le Jeune, 2009). These canons have been a guide for all media houses and media professionals who ply their trade in the media terrain.
However, in recent years, the emergence of fake news disguising itself as factual information has challenged and continues to challenge the status quo of what mainstream news is expected to achieve. Fake news as we see today circulating on all media platforms do not inform, rather they are either intentionally or inadvertently published to misinform (Dentith, 2017).. Gradually, fake news is gaining roots in information dissemination and has taken a niche within the spectrum of the information ecosystem.
The unrestricted access to media use coupled with the difficulty in regulating content especially on online spaces have made it extremely challenging for many policymakers and other stakeholders to find a solution to this festering canker. The danger, however, is that this growing phenomenon has raced into public conversations on key developmental issues. Creators and perpetrators of fake news though may have failed in upholding the principal canons of journalism, the level of attention given to it by those exposed to it makes the fight to exterminate it an arduous one.
Bearing the semblance of a news organisation, the fake news industry is fast becoming an institution on its own where it has creators of information, its audiences and platforms for dissemination of the created information. Given the negative impact that fake news could have on individuals, it is expected that perpetrators of such forms of news would act responsibly, bearing in mind not to sacrifice their right to free speech on the altar of sensationalism and mischief.
Touted as the fourth estate of the realm that holds government and policymakers accountable, the need therefore for information coming from the media to be factually accurate should be a sacred totem that bears on the work of any individual who takes up the responsibility to share information to the general public. However, any effort that deviates from this ideal position is either undermining the work of media professionals or somewhat, staining and blotting the intended impact news information is supposed to have in building strong democracies.
Fake News as a Business Enterprise
As a business enterprise, creators of fake information in the form of click bates, memes, and satires have successfully managed to direct traffic to their web pages in a bid to attract advertisement and attention to their web platforms. These phenomena portray a picture of fake news as a deliberate economic venture (Parsons, 2020) that capitalizes on the curious tendencies of humanity. As a bait, the news item lures readers to a web page to read stories often created by online users to serve as a deviation from the facts of information.
The flip side of the argument, however, is that fake news is occasionally used by competitors in a capitalist market to tarnish the brands of other competitors in the same market. The overarching goal is to cause disaffection for a product or service in favour of a demand for the other in the same market space. Thus, fake news has become the conduit for trade wars and competition for clients in the business arena.
One of the underpinning tenets of democracies is a free market economy where individuals with resources can engage in legal businesses with the aim of making profit. Taxes from such private businesses in most cases have been the financial mainstay used to bankroll developmental activities across the length and breadth of a country. As a cardinal principle, democratic governments encourage private businesses to operate in a free and conducive environment and, by and large, their operation is expected to have a positive impact on the country’s economy, therewith, reducing unemployment and creating wealth at the same time.
Thus, fake news is not restricted to the inky fraternity but spreads its tentacles to the world of business. While media audiences continue to scratch their heads over how to overcome this menace, the business environment is not spared the agony that fake news brings along. As a constituent of democracy, businesses truly need the air to survive and flourish and given the prowling impact of fake news on business survival, the clarion call for perpetrators of fake news to halt their activities has become louder than before.
Like the media front, exposure to fake information about a product or service offering of a company spreads so fast that even when the information is fact-checked and turned out to be untrue, fewer numbers get to know the truth of the false story first circulated. Ironically, in many instances, the true originators of the stories are unknown yet online users share information without a prompt about verifying the source.
Fake News as a Political Strategy
The politics of fake news is perhaps the most common in most democracies. For example, in the United States of America, fake news gained momentum prior to the coming into office of President Donald Trump in 2016. He often branded news organisations as perpetrating fake news and branded some news information about him as fake. Indeed, in the 2020 US presidential race, the issue of fake news resurfaced and was used by both the Republican Party and the Democrats as well.
In Ghana, the use of fake news as a political weapon to run down competing opponents in either a presidential or a parliamentary race is common. Political opponents crisscrossing the length and breadth of the country get closer to the electorate and make promises in an attempt to win their confidence for votes. Some of the campaign messages come along with statements that when verified, turn out to be outright falsehoods. Political parties, especially the two main contending parties in the just-ended presidential elections in Ghana, the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC) had groups online that propagated messages about one another that turned out to be untrue when subjected to the litmus test of verification. A viral video of Ghana’s President Akuffo-Addo, purporting that he was taking a bribe was found to be a doctored material when the content of the video was subjected to thorough examination by Dubawa, a leading fact-checking organisation in Ghana.
To the extent that political race is ultimately aimed at getting control over power and resources, these fake news in public discourses are often targeted at opponents to tarnish a projected reputation. The democratic system of governance in Ghana allows for the exchange of ideas in any public place of opinion. However, like all the other challenges associated with fake news, the factual basis of disseminated information is often missing, rather, a forceful attempt is made by the peddlers of such misleading information to present the information as true and sacrosanct (Dentith, 2017).
With perhaps no interest to verify information or perhaps, totally naïve about fact-checking, the electorate is likely to be exposed to and further embrace misleading stories in public space or on media platforms. Such fake stories are eventually disseminated to an even more vulnerable population who do not have the resources and the know-how to either do an independent verification or seek assistance from professional bodies to fact-check information. This lacuna created by the limited number of fact-checking organisations in Ghana has, in many ways, given the grounds for fake news to outpace fact-checked information on media platforms.
Fake News as a Social Media Phenomenon
Without a doubt, fake news has become synonymous with online spaces. The creation of echo chambers online has given the wheels to the spread of fake news in almost all facets of the socio-cultural aspect of human life. Digital media platforms have become a megaphone for online users who wish to share one information or the other whether factual or laden with factual inaccuracies.
A major characteristic feature with these online users and by extension the echo chambers is that they believe in information shared in the groups they belong to online and no amount of dissenting views they are exposed to will change their already held beliefs (Rhodes, 2019). Indeed, some scholars have argued that the major reason why misinformation continues to thrive is that fake news shared in online groups tends to reinforce an already held biases of the members of the group and no amount of an alternative to their “truth” will ever change their position on an issue.
While successive governments in a country make efforts to entrench democratic ideals, it is expected that journalists and media users share information that is factually accurate and purposefully truthful. A deviation from this norm is indicative of an abuse of the right to free speech that the constitution of the republic grants citizens.
Implications of Fake News on Democratic Governance
The various pillars of democracy are ultimately aimed at promoting development and empowering the masses to be actively involved in the decision making processes at the grassroots to the national level of public discourse. The right to free speech is expected to be respected by countries like Ghana that have signed on to related international protocols. In recent years, however, the attending challenges that have come with the right of individuals to freely express their opinion on social media platforms has triggered debates among policymakers as to how best to ensure that information shared on media platforms are devoid of untruths.
Three main areas often appear hardly hit by the spread of fake news in most democratic societies where free speech is often a trump card and a hallmark of the country – lack of public trust in information, threat to human lives and lack of public and community support for government initiatives.
Lack of trust in information
Fake news blurs the lines between the facts and falsehood and often it takes painstaking verification to ascertain the truth in an information one is exposed to. As fake news grows in leaps and bounds, the effect has been a certain lack of interest in information shared on media platforms. This occurrence has a rippling effect on several areas of society including casting doubt on information shared by government sources and other relevant bodies in the country.
The danger in it is simply that where the citizenry is needed to adhere to one information or the other, they may dismiss it; tainting it with doubts. This of course has the effect of stonewalling the efforts in promoting the good ideals of democratic principles in countries such as Ghana.
Threat on lives
Another challenge from the effect of fake news on the populace is the reluctance to participate in national activities. If fake news succeeds in discrediting a source of information, it equally goes to put doubt on the message coming from the same source.
One area that perpetrators of fake news have often targeted is the health and wellness sector. In the past few months, the entire globe has been brought to its knees by the rampaging impact of the coronavirus pandemic. Many theories have been advanced about what the cause of the disease may have been and medicines that could cure the disease. Many of the so-called antidotes to the coronavirus infection have proven to be untrue.
With a recent announcement of a vaccine found to help combat the disease, some conspiracy theories have suddenly flung through the roof with a warning to many to resist taking the vaccines. As governments in many countries make the effort to acquire and immunize their citizens, a potential face-off is likely to emerge where many who have been exposed to information about the toxin nature of the vaccines are likely to abstain and this may derail the effort of many countries to safeguard the lives of its citizens.
Lack of Public and Community Support for Government Initiatives
With information discredited, getting the support of the citizenry to support a government initiative will often come with challenges. Fake news targeting government policies can cause disaffection for the government and its officials and this could translate in lack of support for a successful implementation of one project or programme or the other.
Democracy, as has been famously defined, is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. It stands to reason that any form of governance without the input of the masses is likely to suffer hitches and eventually cause dissatisfaction for a government in power. Given such circumstances, governments almost always make the effort to rally the citizens along with any form of policy initiative. The danger, however, is that, when fake news and falsehood are targeted at running down such initiatives the tendency for it to hit a snag is high because of lack of support from the populace. Propaganda has often been used within political circles to achieve this agenda. The end effect, however, is that intended developmental projects will lag.
Conclusion
Information and exchange of ideas have always been at the heart of building strong democracies. The upsurge in fake news has obviously muddied the information ecosystem and these concerns have triggered attention to find an antidote to confront the growing menace. Fact-checking institutions have come in handy in an effort to ensure sanity in the dissemination of messages on media platforms. Arguably, with many of these institutions available, citizens will have assurances of messages they are exposed to on media platforms and the resultant effect will be tacit support for government projects and programmes and trust in government information will be high.
Reference
Anderson, J & Rainie, L (2017). The Future of Truth and Misinformation Online. Pew
ResearchCenter. Retrieved from http://www.elon.edu/docs/e-web/imagining/surveys/2017_survey/Future_of_Info_Environment_Elon_University_Pew_10-18-17.pdf
Bell, I. (2014). Creators, Audiences, and New Media: Creativity in an Interactive
Cantarella, M., Fraccaroli, N., & Volpe, (2019). Does fake news affect voting
behaviour? DEMB Working Paper Series (146). Retrieved from http://merlino.unimo.it/campusone/web_dep/wpdemb/0146.pdf
Dentith, X. R. M. (2017). The Problem of Fake News. Public Reason 8 (1-2): 65-79. Retrieved from https://philpapers.org/archive/dentpo-31.pdf
Fletcher, R., Cornia, A., Graves, L & Nielsen, K. R. (2018). Measuring the reach of “fake
news” and online disinformation in Europe. Factsheet, Reuters Institute. Retrieved from https://www.press.is/static/files/frettamyndir/reuterfake.pdf
Le Jeune, M. (2009). To inform, educate and entertain? British broadcasting in the twenty-first century. Centre for Policy Studies. Retrieved from https://www.cps.org.uk/files/reports/original/111027112808-20090324PublicServicesToInformEducateAndEntertain.pdf
O’Flaherty, M (2012). Freedom of Expression: Article 19 of the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights and the Human Rights Committee’s General Comment No 34. Human Rights Law Review 12 (4), Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://www.corteidh.or.cr/tablas/r29946.pdf
Parsons, D. D. (2020). The Impact of Fake News on Company Value: Evidence from Tesla and Galena Biopharma. Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. Retrieved from https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3363&context=utk_chanhonoproj
Rhodes, C. S. (2019). Echo Chambers and Misinformation: How Social Media Use Conditions Individuals to Believe Fake News. A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Washington State University School of Politics, Philosophy, and Public Affairs. Retrieved from https://research.libraries.wsu.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/2376/16815/Rhodes_wsu_0251E_12799.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Wang, T-L. (2020) Does Fake News Matter to Election Outcomes?: The Case Study of
Ghana heads to the polls for its eighth democratic elections in the 4th Republic on December 7, 2020.
Over 17 million eligible voters are expected to participate in this exercise in 33,367 polling stations across the country.
Unlike previous elections, many have been awakened to the dangers of false information especially from the political class on the country’s democracy.
Previous elections have witnessed a number of false information including vile propaganda, malicious claims, and wild rumours, many of which spread so fast and likely influenced the polls.
With fact-checking steadily gaining roots in Ghana’s democratic space, there are great expectations that false information will be aggressively tackled during the electioneering period.
Dubawa Ghana has already formed important partnerships with the Coalition of Election Observers (CODEO), and the National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE) to police public discourse and ensure that the elections are conducted in a manner devoid of falsehoods, exaggerations and concocted stories.
Other fact-checkers, like Dubawa Ghana, have already produced many fact checks that have revealed the truth behind several public claims made by political actors.
This development must be highly appreciated as a necessity for the media in a growing democracy such as Ghana’s.
That notwithstanding, the work of fact-checkers will be put to serious test during the upcoming polls which, based on past experiences, will be characterized by a number of incidents that could make false information thrive.
This is a test because rigorous fact-checking is less than barely fours years old in Ghana and this is the first electioneering period being keenly followed by independent fact-checkers.
Considering some of the common incidents that have characterized election days in Ghana in the past, below are some of the common claims fact-checkers may have to deal with on December 7.
The ballot box that got snatched: The thought of a ballot box being snatched at a polling station will not be strange to the ears of any Ghanaian political watcher. It is among the common incidents claimed to have happened during the country’s major elections. Due to high levels of mistrust for political opponents, such reports are easily believed by people who will not suffer themselves to verify, perhaps because it is very possible. Fact-checkers will be needed to look into such claims.
Violent clashes near or at a polling station: Ghana’s security agencies have identified some 6,178 communities as flashpoints for violence for this election. This was based on crime trends and incidents during previous elections. It, therefore, wouldn’t be hard to take in that violent clashes have occurred at a polling station within the identified areas. The fact that an area is noted for violence does not necessarily mean any claim of violence there is true.
Discovery of hidden ballot papers: Often you’ll hear of claims about the discovery some thumb-printed ballot papers hidden somewhere. This may come up in making allegations of election fraud and has the potential discrediting the country’s polls. Fact-checkers can help to bring out the truth. Indeed, through the work of fact-checkers on such issues, followers could be better informed about relevant context, if any, and if the claim is even accurate or exaggerated.
‘Unofficial’ results: As the world becomes more sophisticated, it has become easy to fake documents to prove anything. One can easily fall for this if due diligence, as done in the case by fact-checkers is not prioritized. People with malicious intents can manipulate photos of voter result sheets, known as pink sheets to give wrong results.
The ‘recycled’ throwbacks: One of the common claims that will likely be seen will be the use of old images or videos and materials from other countries to make a case for something that is alleged to have happened at a polling station in real-time during the elections. Adding visual materials whether unrelated or old makes claims believable but not necessarily true. Fact-checkers again will help prove true or false such multimedia claims.
There are many other potential claims fact-checkers will encounter in covering the upcoming polls and they will need to diligently work their way to get the truth to an expectant audience.
In the end, fact-checkers will greatly help to make the 2020 polls more credible and also further solidify their place in helping to instil truth in public discourse.
Special Voting results show NPP is in the lead – social media users claim
There have been no counting and declaration of results from the Special Voters by the Electoral Commission. It will be done after the polls on December 7
Full text
The Constitutional Instrument 94 allows for a Special Voting day for voters who, as a result of election duties, will not be able to be present at the polling station where the voter is registered on the day of the election.
The Special Voters list this year includes security agencies, the media and officers of the Electoral Commission who will be on assignment on election day.
This exercise happened on Monday, December 1, 2020, and few hours after voting, some Facebook users and Twitter users posted what is purported to be the results from the Special Voting in favour of their preferred political party.
Verification
Are Special Votes counted and results declared before election day?
The 2020 Constitutional Instrument 127 specifies that the ballot boxes are sealed after the special voting with the seals of the Electoral Commission and opened at the time of the counting of the votes from the day of the election.
Regulation 23 of 2020 CI 127 which details the process of the special voters’ list also indicates who should be in charge of the ballot papers after the close of the special voting and the day for it to be counted.
It states:
(11) The returning officer shall, at the end of the special voting,
(a) ensure that the ballot boxes are kept in safe custody after the poll has closed;
(b) ensure that the ballot boxes are sealed with the seals of the Commission and any candidates who wish to add their seal; and
(c) arrange for the ballot boxes to be opened at the time of the counting of the votes cast on the polling day and the ballot papers shall be counted in the same manner as those contained in the ballot boxes used on the polling day.
Dubawa also enquired from the National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE) about the counting of ballot boxes from Special Voting exercise, and it was explained that the ballot boxes from the Special Voting have been locked and kept away until after elections on December 7, which will be counted together with the ballot boxes from election day.
The Director of Communications and Corporate Affairs at NCCE, Mrs Joyce Afutu stated that,
“No vote has been counted yet, everything will be counted and results declared after election day on Monday.’’
Who declares the election results?
Only the Chairman of the Electoral Commission, according to the 2020 C.I. 127, is responsible for declaring the election results after the assembling and collating of results from the regions and duly following the necessary protocols, after election day on 7 December,
Till then, all other declaration of results are to be disregarded.
Conclusion
The claim indicating that NPP records 63% from the special voters is false. The C.I 127 does not permit the counting of ballot boxes from Special Voters till after the day of the election on 7 December. Additionally, only the Chairman of the EC is mandated to declare the results after all ballot boxes have been counted after election day.
With the upcoming general elections in December 2020, the major political parties in Ghana have been throwing light on their achievements during their administrations in the bid to win favour in the eyes of Ghanaian voters.
After this presentation on August 18th, 2020, the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) came out to highlight some of the inconsistencies in the figures quoted by the Vice President and some officials of the New Patriotic Party (NPP).
As stated by the Member of Parliament for North Tongu, Hon. Okudzeto, via his Twitter page, the figures stated on the Community Day Senior High Schools completed during the NDC administration by the Vice president and the Education Minister are inconsistent.
Image source: Twitter.com
This is unfortunately true.
On March 7th, 2017 graphic.com.gh published an article in which the Minister of Education, Mr. Matthew Opoku Prempeh, is reported to have quoted a different figure.
“Only forty-six out of the 200 planned Community Day Senior High School projects initiated by the National Democratic Congress (NDC) government has been completed,” the article stated.
Fast forward to 18th August, 2020. The Vice President of the Republic of Ghana, Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, stated during the “Presentation of the Government Infrastructure Development During The First Term in Office” that the NDC government completed 29 community day senior high schools. This can be seen on page 56 of the speech read by the Vice President, in the column named “Completed by 2016”. See Screenshot below.
Another instance of inconsistent figures on executed government projects was the July 2020 report on Facebook, by the Deputy Education Minister, Dr. Yaw Osei Adutwum, which stated that Three Hundred and Thirteen Thousand, Eight Hundred and Thirty-Seven (313, 837) senior high school students would be writing the West African Senior Schools Certificate Examination (WASSCE). This was repeated on the official Facebook and Twitter pages of the President, Nana Akufo- Addo.
Both Facebook accounts of the President and the Deputy Minister have since corrected the mistake in the figure stated, however, the twitter account of the President still has the wrong figure in the post made on July 19th, 2020. This was evident when Dubawa made a followup to see if the error had been rectified on the various accounts. See below screenshot taken on August 20th, 2020 below.
Why does this matter?
Millions of Ghanaians are exposed to wrong figures either intentionally or otherwise. Based on the followership of the parties or examples used in this article alone; President Akufo-Addo (1.5 Million followers on Twitter), V.P Bawumia (835,712 followers on Facebook), Hon. Okudzeto Ablakwa (90.4K followers on Twitter), and Hon. Osei Adutwum (113, 476 followers on Facebook), it is clear what a large number of citizens are exposed to by information from state actors.
The broad ecosystem of false information, corrected information, true figures, and contested figures, create a web of uncertainty and possible confusion for people who are exposed to them. This is why it is important for government, politicians, and government agencies to come clear and be consistent with information they put out in the public space. This is vital in ensuring that the citizenry are able to make informed decisions based on actual and truthful information without any uncertainties.
PS: Dubawa has contacted the relevant agencies for clarity on the claims made by Dr Bawumia and that members of the opposition have made regarding the number of community day SHS built so far.
John Dramani Mahama is a former president of Ghana and the flagbearer of the largest opposition political party, the National Democratic Congress (NDC), in the 2020 presidential elections with Professor Naana Jane Opoku-Agyeman as his running mate.
His political journey began when he contested elections to represent the Bole-Bamboi constituency in the 1996 elections and stayed in office as a legislator for eight years (1996-2000 and 2000-2004).
He was appointed Deputy Communications Minister in 1997 by the Jerry Rawlings administration. He went on to become the Minister of Communications from 1998 to 2001 under the same Rawlings administration. He also served as the Chairman for the National Communications Authority during his time as minister.
From 2001 to 2005, Mahama was the Minority Parliamentary Spokesperson for Communication and continued to become the Minority parliamentary spokesperson for Foreign Affairs from 2005 to 2008.
Following the death of Atta Mills on July 24, 2012, Mahama was sworn in as President of Ghana. In December of the same year, he was elected President until 2016 when he lost power to President Nana Akufo-Addo.
He was born to politician father Emmanuel Adama Mahama, who was a member of Parliament for Gonja West Constituency. His father was also, under the leadership of Dr Kwame Nkrumah, the first Regional Commissioner of the Northern Region.
After gaining a Bachelor’s of Arts Degree in History at the University of Ghana in 1981, Mahama began a career in teaching back at Ghana Secondary School.
In 1986, John Mahama graduated with a postgraduate diploma in Communication Studies from the University of Ghana. He again pursued another postgraduate degree in Social Psychology in 1988 in Moscow at the Institute of Social Sciences.
Upon his return to Ghana, he worked at the Embassy of Japan as Information, Culture and Research Officer until 1995. Following this, he worked as the International Relations, Sponsorship, Communication, and Grants Manager at the Ghana Office of the Plan International.
A Twitter account purported to belong to Papa Kwesi Nduom claims he has said NDC’s Naana Opoku Agyeman is far better than ‘talkative’ Bawumia
Papa Kwesi Nduom office says the tweet is not from him. The accountwhich tweeted the claim is not the official Twitter account of the politician.
Full text
A tweet by Papa Kwesi Nduom, using the handle @papakwesijunior, on Monday, July 6, 2020, said:
“John Mahama’s running mate Prof. Jane Opoku Agyeman is far best than this current veep Bawumia. Mr. Talkative with no action…. If Nana Addi lose this years elections I wouldn’t blame anyone than Bawumia. A full time Comedian can’t match a Professor. #JJ2020 #4More4Nana #JohnMahama2020 #KickNanaOut #ImWithHer.”
That tweet has received more than 1,000 reactions and has been widely circulated. It has also formed the basis for some web publications such as the ones on My Africa Today, Cover Ghana, Report Ghana and a video by Social TV GH.
Just to give a little context, Paa Kwesi Nduom, officially called Papa Kwesi Nduom, is the founder of the Progressive People’s Party (PPP), one of Ghana’s many opposition parties.
Dr Bawumia is Ghana’s current vice president and running mate for the New Patriotic Party’s (NPP) flagbearer, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo.
While it is possible for Dr Papa Kwesi Nduom to criticize Dr Bawumia because they are both at different ends of the political divide, the nature of the tweet and the obvious grammatical errors in it make it rather suspicious.
Verification
We reached out to Papa Kwesi Nduom’s office, Group Nduom Corporate Affairs, for an official response.
“I can tell you on authority that it is not from Papa Kwesi Nduom. A lot of tweets from that account do not even make sense. We have reported the account to Twitter,” the office said.
Other independent checks carried out further indicate the tweet could not have come from the politician and businessman.
Checks on Papa Kwesi Nduom’s active Facebook page where he makes all public comments showed no trace of the comment ascribed to him in respect of Dr Bawumia nor any indication that Papa Kwesi Nduom posted anything on Facebook on July 6, 2020 when the tweet was made.
His website, which he actively used during his presidential campaign in 2016 also did not show any such comment.
However, on the website, we found a link to all his official social media accounts including his Twitter, which listed a different account ID from the one that has gone viral.
On his website, his official Twitter ID is pknduom and not paakwesijunior, which made the viral tweet.
The official Twitter account, created in March 2011, also shows a link back to his official Facebook page.
The other Twitter account that made the tweet was however created in July 2019.
While the pknduom account has over 200,000 followers, the paakwesijunior account, from which the news articles sourced the quote for their stories, has less than 600 followers.
In the bio of the paakwesijunior, it states that “You will bounce back in wealth @pknduom is my Godfather,” clearly suggesting that the account is not being managed by the politician and businessman Papa Kwesi Nduom. Therefore, the comments expressed via that account most likely do not represent him or express his sentiments.
Conclusion
The office of Papa Kwesi Nduom says the tweet is not from the politician and businessman. Moreover, Papa Kwesi Nduom’s official twitter account is @pknduom and not the account from which the claim emanated.
