VZCZCXRO1169
PP RUEHMA RUEHPA
DE RUEHAR #1462 3191322
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 141322Z NOV 08
FM AMEMBASSY ACCRA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 7253
INFO UEHZK/ECOWAS COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RHMFISS/CDR USAFRICOM STUTTGART GE PRIORITY

UNCLAS ACCRA 001462 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR AF/W 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: GH KDEM PGOV PHUM PINS PREL
SUBJECT: GHANA ELECTIONS: THE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES 
 
¶1. SUMMARY. For the first time in its history, Ghana has held 
two nationally-televised presidential debates in which the 
candidates for both major parties, along with the two minor 
parties that currently hold seats in Parliament, came 
together to answer questions on the issues facing the 
country.  By any standard, the debates were an unqualified 
success.  The candidates stayed on message, presented their 
party platforms, showed respect for one another, and 
committed their parties to fair and peaceful elections.  With 
a few notable exceptions, the debates made for ho-hum 
political theater, but they served a greater purpose in 
reassuring Ghanaian voters that the candidates could 
criticize one another in a civil manner and still end up 
calling for peace at the end of the day. END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2. Ghana's Institute of Economic Affairs (with funding from 
the British High Commission and the U.S. Center for 
International Private Enterprise) organized two presidential 
debates, the first in Accra on October 29 and the second in 
the northern city of Tamale on November 12.  Although eight 
candidates are vying for president on the December 7 ballot, 
the Institute held the number of debaters down to the four 
parties which currently have Parliamentary representatives. 
The format for both debates was a formal question and answer 
session with each candidate given two minutes to respond in 
turn to questions from a pair of moderators from the media 
and academia.  Questions had been solicited in advance from 
members of the general public, professional bodies, and other 
associations, and covered such subjects as education, 
development, the economy, agriculture, health, foreign 
affairs, corruption, and conflict resolution. 
 
¶3. While the format left little room for actual debate 
between the presidential hopefuls, the two major party 
candidates -- Nana Akufo-Addo of the ruling New Patriotic 
Party (NPP) and John Atta-Mills of the National Democratic 
Congress (NDC) -- did manage to trade barbs in the first 
debate, with Akufo-Addo breaking the rhythm of the Q and A on 
several occasions to rebut Atta-Mills' assertions of failed 
NPP policies.  All four aspirants showed more discipline in 
the second debate, although the question of corruption and 
declaration of personal assets (including a direct question 
from the moderator on how many houses each candidate owned) 
elicited more lively exchanges.  All of the debaters admitted 
that corruption was a problem in Ghana, but Atta-Mills was 
more persistant in asserting that it "had gotten worse and 
worse with a level of ostentation not seen before." 
Akufo-Addo took this as an affront to the Kufuor years, and 
just as the debate was coming to a break, he insisted on 
being given the opportunity to respond to the accusation. The 
moderator held his ground, and said he would have his chance 
to respond later.  After the break, however, Akufo-Addo 
apparently thought better of returning to this topic, and the 
subject was dropped. 
 
¶4. Most impartial observers seemed to think that the 
Convention People's Party (CPP) candidate Paa Kwesi Nduom 
came out on top in the first debate, making short cogent 
arguments and looking directly at the camera in a way that 
connected with the audience.  He also had the best sound 
bites, the most memorable being his riposte to Akufo-Addo's 
declaration that the private sector was the engine of growth 
for the economy.  To great audience delight, Nduom replied it 
didn't do much good to have an engine just laying there. 
"What I want to add is a body, and four tires, and a steering 
wheel, and a competent driver."  Edward Mahama of the 
People's National Convention (PNC) was considered the weakest 
of the four in the first round, while Atta-Mills' answers 
seemed competent but uninspired.  Akufo-Addo spent much of 
the debate looking at the floor and not at the camera as his 
answers frequently exceeded his time limit.  In the second 
debate, however, Nduom did not match his first-round luster, 
while the other candidates, especially Akufo-Addo, improved 
markedly in both delivery and substance. 
 
¶5. COMMENT.  In the end, the real winner was the Ghanaian 
electorate, which witnessed two fine, issues-oriented debates 
in which their politicians all turned in credible 
performances, joked and chatted with each other during 
breaks, and behaved admirably on a national stage with live 
radio and television coverage and extensive post-debate 
analysis in all news media.  As the candidates prepared to 
make their closing statements, the moderator asked them to 
publicly commit their parties to peaceful elections. Each in 
turn did so, but that was not enough for the moderator.  He 
then asked them to all stand, hold hands, and together urge 
their followers to pursue peace.  With those clasped hands 
and unified words, the debates came to an end. 
TEITELBAUM