One of the most striking contrasts in Ghana’s political landscape is how the two dominant parties respond when their members come under public scrutiny.

The 'New Patriotic Party (NPP)' is known for its strong unity, quickly rallying to support its members against external criticism. In stark contrast, the 'National Democratic Congress (NDC)' often appears paralyzed, leaving its members to face political storms without support. The recent controversy surrounding D'r. Mary Awusi* provides a clear example of this institutional difference.

The firestorm began after Dr. Awusi, the CEO of the Ghana Free Zones Authority, made comments on Accra FM on April 23, 2026. Responding to criticisms from *Apostle Eric Nyamekye, Chairman of the Church of Pentecost, about the government’s handling of illegal mining, Dr. Awusi suggested that the clergyman had entered partisan territory.

Her remark—“He is a man of God, so we will forgive him, but next time he shouldn’t come so low… they will deal with him as a politician”—was quickly seized upon by opponents as a sacrilegious threat.

The NPP’s response was swift and precise.

Dr. Nana Ayew Afriye, the MP for Effiduase-Asokore, issued a rebuttal along with a 48-hour ultimatum demanding an apology, invoking the "wrath" of his constituents.

By framing the political disagreement as an existential threat to both the Effiduase-Asokore community and the Church of Pentecost, the NPP successfully shifted the narrative from a policy discussion on mining to a moral crusade.

The pressure escalated beyond the constituency level.

Henry Nana Boakye, the NPP National Organizer, called for President John Mahama to dismiss Dr. Awusi.

By labeling her comments as “distasteful attacks,” he aimed to put the Presidency on the defensive while signaling to NPP supporters that the party leadership would take decisive action against dissent involving its allies in the clergy.

While the NPP functioned as a unified front, the NDC's response—or lack thereof—was marked by a glaring silence.

There was no coordinated effort from the party’s communications team to contextualize Dr. Awusi’s remarks or defend her right to challenge political critiques, regardless of the source. No senior party official stepped forward to clarify her position, allowing the NPP to shape the narrative without opposition.

This absence of support has left Dr. Awusi isolated in the political arena. Although she faces criticism from various quarters, her party seems content to remain uninvolved.

This lack of solidarity creates an environment where members' reputations can be attacked by opponents without any defensive response from their own party.

Critics argue that this incident is not an isolated case but rather a recurring feature of the NDC’s internal culture.

A consistent pattern emerges: when NPP members face legal or reputational crises, the party’s machinery gears up to offer unwavering solidarity.

Conversely, NDC members often find that when faced with political pressure, leadership tends to distance itself rather than provide support.

The psychological impact of this disparity on the party’s base is significant. Political loyalty is inherently a reciprocal contract. If rank-and-file members feel that the party will not support them during tough times, it stifles their willingness to advocate boldly.

The NPP’s fortress-like approach fosters internal cohesion, while the NDC’s reluctance can create a culture of caution and resentment.

Even those who believe Dr. Awusi may have erred in her choice of words must recognize the strategic failure of her party.

In the high-stakes arena of Ghanaian politics, perception often outweighs reality.

By failing to defend her, the NDC inadvertently validated the opposition's outrage, making their appointee appear to be a liability rather than a leader merely highlighting partisan criticism.

As the situation surrounding Dr. Mary Awusi unfolds, the NDC faces a crucial question: Can a party that does not protect its own truly inspire the confidence needed to advance a national agenda?

Until the party learns to match the NPP’s protective fervor, its members may continue to find themselves as "orphans" in the very house they helped build.