Abraham Amaliba, the Director of Conflict Resolution for the National Democratic Congress (NDC), has cast doubt on the effectiveness of the Peace Pact signed by presidential candidates ahead of the upcoming elections.
On November 28 in Accra, political parties and their candidates signed the 4th Presidential Election Peace Pact, which aimed to ensure a peaceful election process before, during, and after December 7. However, Amaliba, in an interview with Selorm Adonoo on Channel One TV’s The Big Issues, expressed skepticism about the value of such agreements.
He argued that the dynamics of electoral violence had changed, with state security forces now becoming the perpetrators, instead of vigilante groups, during election periods. Amaliba stated that he believed the peace pact would not bring any tangible results.
The NDC’s conflict resolution director also questioned the absence of key officials, including President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo and National Security Minister Albert Kan Dapaah, at the peace pact signing ceremony.
He pointed out that these individuals, responsible for citizen protection and security, should have been present to demonstrate their commitment to the process.
“For me, this old-style peace pact signing does not address the current situation we find ourselves in, particularly when it comes to violence. You notice that from 2017, Ayawaso West Wuogon [by election], the violence that we see at our collation centres or election areas, it’s not the violence that we used to see in 1992, 1998.
“This violence has now changed, in the past, it was macho men [well-built men], allegedly belonging to the political parties who were causing mayhem. And so, those peace pacts could address that type of threat. Today, the threat is no longer coming from vigilanteism and the fact that the political parties have disowned them. Now, unfortunately, the threat is coming from state agencies.
“This old style of peace pact cannot address this type of situation. I expected the Peace Council and IDEG who were the conveners of this peace pact to have provided a place for the president to sign because he’s the commander-in-chief of the army. It was the army that was used and it will be used this time.
“I expected the signing of the national security minister, interior minister, and minister of defence. The violence has shifted, it’s now state army and state-sponsored attacks on citizens. So for me, this peace pact is much-ado about nothing, because it’s not going to address the use of the army.”
