Undoubtedly, Ghana is a country full of surprising developments, especially in the political arena. But was it my imagination, or did I see a TV news clip of President John Mahama expressing initial comments that seemed to blame the system used under the previous government, for the ghastly recruitment stampede that caused the deaths of six ‘Ghana royals’ on November 12, 2025?
And did I really hear President Mahama, Commander-in-Chief of the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF), say that the exercise should have been better organised, but that it had been done according to the existing format which his administration had inherited; and they would now improve it?
But even without an investigation, isn’t it natural to think that those who organise an exercise should be the first to be held responsible for its outcome, good or bad?
Anyway, the Accra exercise which was suspended after the stampede tragedy, is to resume on Thursday, November 20, 2025. President Mahama directed that it should be on hold for the process to be reviewed. However, the exercise in other regions continued.
According to media reports, the deceased were six young women who were among the 34 stampede victims rushed to the 37 Military Hospital on that fateful Wednesday morning. In response to media advertisements, some 21,000 young men and women had thronged the El-Wak Stadium, Accra, for screening for possible enlistment into the various arms of the GAF.
A statement issued by the GAF said preliminary investigations indicated that the stampede was triggered by an unexpected surge of applicants who rushed to enter the stadium at 06:20 a.m., ahead of the commencement.
Briefing Parliament on November 12, Finance Minister and currently Acting Minister for Defence, Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson, confirmed the six deaths, and a number injured, some critically and on admission at the 37 Military Hospital.
Dr. Forson noted that the recruitment process, had been decentralised to ease congestion and ensure transparency.
‘The Ministry of Defence has extended its condolences to the bereaved families,’ and he assured the public of a thorough investigation into the incident.
Under the new arrangements the resumed Accra exercise will take place at eight sub-centres within five locations, including El-Wak. Qualified applicants in batches of 600 persons would each receive a text message with details.
One wishes that the revised procedure will ensure minimum inconvenience for the applicants.
Nevertheless, the deaths of six young women in a manner one wouldn’t want to hear about even in a nightmare, is a huge blot on the image of the GAF.
How was it possible for applicants for recruitment into our GAF, noted globally for efficiency and discipline, to meet such a terrible fate?
Should the organisers not have assessed the existing system to see if it needed changes?
Furthermore, surely, those in charge of the exercise knew what numbers to expect, going by the thousands who had bought the GHS
200 application form?
Did they factor in the numbers, said to be 21,000? That figure is a stark, terrifying reflection of the gravity of the country’s unemployment problem; realistically, to be tackled by private sector jobs.
Why was it not possible to stagger the recruitment, to cater for a manageable number each day, possibly even allowing for the provision of seating?
Were there any toilets? Reportedly, some applicants had started queuing the previous night!
From the images, most applicants were wearing white t-shirts, meaning that perhaps they had received an instruction about a dress code. So why didn’t the same dress code thinking extend to ensuring the well-being, health and safety of the applicants?
Not surprisingly, a Board of Inquiry was immediately announced, to find out the answers to the inevitable questions about the stampede; a country in shock and needing answers.
But the general skepticism about investigation verdicts, evident in online comments, is quite understandable. Ours is a country where we are quick to set up investigation bodies, with fanfare, but the conclusions are usually slow in coming; and, worse, hardly ever do we get to know the identified offenders and their punishment.
Take the example of the recurrent fire outbreaks in markets, why are there always immediate promises of an investigation, but the outcome is hardly ever made known?
Usually, investigation findings are in the ‘non-stick’ realm; no charge sticks to anybody; nobody is held accountable, what I term ‘Teflon verdicts’ – to borrow a tag from the nickname first given to the 40th US President, Ronald Reagan, ‘Teflon President’. (Teflon is a kind of plastic used to coat pots and pans so that the food will not stick to the bottom during cooking.)
According to reference sources, it was ‘Representative Patricia Schroeder, a Democrat from Colorado, (who in 1983) coined the term ‘Teflon President’ in reference to Ronald Reagan. She said, ‘He’s just like a Teflon frying pan: Nothing sticks to him’. Schroeder was frustrated by the president’s ability to evade blame for political and economic issues, unlike other politicians.’
If no blame for anybody, how can there be punishment to serve as a deterrent?
Anyhow, I hope that the revised recruitment format is hassle free for the already conceivably stressed applicants.
Notably, the GAF November 12 trauma has highlighted the supremacy of the mobile phone in our lives. These days it appears that every employment opportunity depends on a job-seeker having a sophisticated mobile phone!
It’s interesting, and disturbing, that the assumption is that every young person, every aspiring GAF recruit has a smartphone, capable of undertaking the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) tasks required by the application process!
Perhaps the fact that as many as 21,000 were able to manouvre their way through the online process and qualify for the 2025 screening, indicates that it is ‘doable’.
But does it mean that it is a level playing field? Is it truly an all-inclusive opportunity?
Should it be assumed that every potential applicant has a smartphone? Or that everyone lives in an area with good mobile phone network?
Does this state of affairs take account of the digital divide (‘the gulf between those who have ready access to computers and the internet, and those who do not’); the importance of inclusivity ‘equal access to opportunities and resources’?
Thus, I see as a factor for consideration the need to devise an avenue for would-be applicants who don’t have smartphones or ICT expertise – surely, there will be some?
Another issue on my mind: in the resumed exercise, are the November 12 applicants required to go through the same application process? Are they to pay the same fee? Why didn’t the release about the resumption provide information about that?
So many questions needing answers!
I can’t help thinking that perhaps it was such perplexing issues that inspired American singer Johnny Nash’s 1972 hit, ‘There are more questions than answers’.
But, hopefully, the Board’s findings will not merit the ‘Teflon verdict’ description.