Afenyo-Markin defends Danquah-Dombo-Busia tradition against elitism claims

The Minority Leader in Parliament, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, has rejected assertions that the Danquah-Dombo-Busia political tradition represents elite interests, insisting that its record demonstrates a longstanding commitment to ordinary Ghanaians.

Delivering a public lecture on March 2 on the tradition’s contribution to Ghana’s socio-economic development, Mr Afenyo-Markin addressed what he described as an allegation that has trailed the political lineage “like a shadow” — the claim that it belongs to the educated few and operates primarily in the interest of the privileged.

He argued that political traditions should be judged not by the social standing of their founders but by “the direction of its policies” and their measurable impact on citizens.

In defending the tradition, he cited the founding vision of Joseph Boakye Danquah, who in 1947 advanced the idea of a property-owning democracy aimed at unleashing “the energies of the people” and enhancing the “life, property and liberty of each and every citizen”.

Mr Afenyo-Markin said this philosophy has consistently informed policy choices under successive administrations of the New Patriotic Party.

Tracing the ideological roots further, he referred to the Aborigines’ Rights Protection Society, which opposed colonial land expropriation, and highlighted Dr Danquah’s legal advocacy on behalf of cocoa farmers, a role that earned him the title “Akuafo Kanea” (Lamp of Farmers).

“This was not the reputation of a man who had turned his back on the people,” Mr Afenyo-Markin asserted. “This was a man who used every tool available to him in the service of the people.”

He described the Danquah-Dombo-Busia tradition as the oldest organised political current in Ghana’s history, formally tracing its roots to the establishment of the United Gold Coast Convention in 1947.

The Minority Leader contrasted the tradition with both the Nkrumahist and Rawlings traditions, particularly on issues concerning economic management, political authority and the drivers of national development.

He maintained that rather than being elitist, the tradition has historically promoted expanded opportunity, private enterprise and individual liberty as the foundation for inclusive national progress.