The Executive Director of the Ghana Centre for Democratic Development (CDD-Ghana) has raised concerns about the Ghana Ministers of State Excellence Awards.

Professor H. Kwasi Prempeh warned that such recognitions could undermine cabinet cohesion and complicate the President’s management of his ministers.

His comments come amid intense public debate over the awards scheme, which has generated criticism from sections of the public and prompted a response from the Presidency.

The awards, organised by Big Events Ghana, sought to recognise outstanding ministerial performance. However, critics have questioned both the timing and appropriateness of ranking ministers serving under the same administration.

Speaking on Joy News’ PM Express Business Edition on Monday, Prof. Prempeh said one of his biggest concerns is the effect such awards could have on presidential decision-making.

According to him, a third party's publicly declared “best minister” could create complications if the President is simultaneously evaluating that minister's performance against internal government benchmarks.

“So assuming, for example, that the President is probably contemplating a reshuffle, on the eve of that decision, is met with an award designating a particular minister as the best minister,” he said.

He noted that such a minister could even face dismissal based on assessments known only to the President.

“Meanwhile, that minister may well have been on the cutting block, on the president's cutting block, right by the president's own internal standards and benchmarks and other things,” he stated.

“This minister was probably going to be given the axe, and all of a sudden we have a third party with some private or whatever interest promoting this person as the one who, in their view, is the best minister.”

Prof. Prempeh argued that this could interfere with the President’s ability to manage personnel decisions within government.

“It complicates presidential decision-making around personnel, managing the president's personnel and who to move here and there,” he said.

Beyond the impact on individual ministers, the governance expert expressed concern about the implications for cabinet solidarity and collective responsibility.

He stressed that ministers are appointed to different portfolios but ultimately work toward a common mandate under the President.

“Ministers, even though appointed to particular roles and assigned particular roles, deliver on a mandate collectively, which flows from the president and also terminates with the president,” he explained.

He said the principle of collective responsibility requires ministers to function as a team rather than compete against one another for personal recognition.

“There is this idea of collective responsibility, and there's a sense in which the ministers must work together as a team to deliver on the mandate of the executive, the president.”

Prof. Prempeh warned that awards that single out individual ministers risk creating incentives for self-promotion rather than collaboration.

“A certain element of teamwork is necessary for this to actually be successful, and when you begin to throw these kinds of perverse incentives that cause one or the other minister or some other ministers to begin to pursue solo projects in order to get personal glory, you can also undermine the teamwork that is at the foundation of this principle of collective responsibility.”

He maintained that the awards could have unintended consequences both at the individual and collective levels of government.

“I think these kinds of awards can have perverse incentives and can undermine the president's ability to properly manage his or her team.”

While acknowledging that public demand for performance assessment may create space for such initiatives, Prof. Prempeh insisted that the broader governance implications should not be ignored.