Political analyst Dr Jonathan Asante Otchere has questioned the political pedigree and stature of New Patriotic Party (NPP) National Chairman John Boadu in comparison with his National Democratic Congress (NDC) counterpart, Johnson Asiedu Nketiah.

Speaking on Channel One TV with Nana Tuffour Boateng on Sunday, October 4, Dr Asante Otchere said the two party chairmen should be assessed based on their political experience, gravitas and the value they bring to their respective parties.

“I have nothing personal against the chairman that has been elected. But you will have to contextualise what he’s bringing on board,” he said.

“Put the two together and you tell me whether John Boadu comes even halfway in terms of pedigree, in terms of gravitas, in terms of value with respect to Mr Asiedu Nketiah,” he added.

His comments followed the election of the NPP’s new national executives at the party’s National Delegates Conference at the Baba Yara Sports Stadium in Kumasi on October 3. John Boadu was elected National Chairman, while Justin Kodua Frimpong retained his position as General Secretary.

Dr Asante Otchere further questioned whether the considerations that led NPP delegates to reject Mr Boadu in a previous national executive election had changed significantly before his latest election.

In his view, Mr Boadu’s victory was shaped more by internal political dynamics than an assessment of competence, pointing specifically to the defeat of former Energy Minister Boakye Agyarko in the chairmanship contest.

“I think that the only reason why John Boadu was elected is not about competency. It’s about the fact that Mr Boakye Agyarko annoys the system,” he said.

He argued that Mr Agyarko, who finished second in the contest, could compete with Mr Asiedu Nketiah on issues including communication, articulation and professional pedigree.

Dr Asante Otchere also drew a comparison between the NPP’s General Secretary, Justin Kodua Frimpong, and the NDC’s General Secretary, Fifi Kwetey, suggesting that the contrasting profiles of the two parties’ leadership should form part of the broader assessment of their political strength and direction.