When we talk about democracy in Ghana, we often celebrate stability, elections, and peaceful transfers of power.
At first glance, progress is visible. Women are voting, speaking, and shaping public discourse in communities on the radio and across digital platforms. Ghana has produced formidable women in public life, alongside countless others organising powerfully at the grassroots. Yet when it comes to elected political power, particularly in Parliament and local government, the numbers tell a different story.
Women remain significantly underrepresented. As of 2025, only 41 out of 276 Members of Parliament, 14.9 per cent, are women. In local assemblies, representation stands at just 4.1 per cent, while ministerial appointments remain below 20 per cent.
These figures fall far short of both the UN’s 30 per cent benchmark and Ghana’s commitments under the Affirmative Action (Gender Equity) Act, 2024 (Act 1121). This gap is not due to a lack of competence or ambition. It is the result of structural and deeply embedded barriers.
Cost of participation
Politics in Ghana has become prohibitively expensive. The Gender Centre for Empowering Development (GenCED)’s research, “The Price to Participate: How Money in Politics Undermines Women and Youth Political Participation in Ghana,” shows that filing fees alone pose a significant barrier.
Parliamentary aspirants in the NPP paid GH¢35,000, while presidential aspirants paid GH¢500,000. In the NDC, the figures were GH¢40,000 and GH¢500,000, respectively.
But these fees are only the entry point. Campaign financing, coupled with expectations around engaging delegates, creates a system where money becomes the primary currency of access.
By the time internal party primaries conclude, many capable women have already been excluded, not because they lack merit, but because they lack financial resources.
The reality is stark: Women are being filtered out before the real contest even begins.
This is no longer just about who can afford to run; it is about who is structurally positioned to win.
Layered onto these financial barriers are cultural expectations and double standards. Women in politics are judged more harshly.
Assertiveness is labelled as aggression, confidence is misinterpreted, and personal lives are scrutinised in ways male counterparts rarely experience.
At the same time, women are expected to balance political ambition with caregiving roles.
These dynamics shape not only public perception, but also access to sponsorship, networks and political backing.
Political party structures
Political parties remain the primary gateway to elected office and one of the most significant bottlenecks to inclusion.
Internal processes, particularly delegate-based primaries, often reinforce exclusion rather than expand access.
While national popularity may matter, it is party delegates, station executives, constituency officers, and regional actors who ultimately determine outcomes.
These gatekeepers operate within systems shaped by loyalty, patronage, and entrenched interests, rather than broad democratic representation.
Our research identifies two dominant forces shaping candidate selection: money and networks.
Financial power, political alliances, and elite endorsements frequently sideline merit.
Even well-intentioned reforms, such as reduced filing fees for women, fail to address the deeper monetised ecosystem.
The result is clear. In the 2024 elections, only 115 out of 774 parliamentary candidates, 14.85 per cent, were women.
Democracy, in this context, risks becoming accessible primarily to those with financial advantage, rather than those with the strongest capacity to lead.
Opportunities
Despite these challenges, there is meaningful progress.
The passage of the Affirmative Action (Gender Equity) Act, 2024 (Act 1121), marks a critical shift.
It mandates a minimum of 30 per cent representation of women in public appointments between 2024 and 2026, increasing to 50 per cent by 2034.
This signal is growing recognition that gender equality is not just a social aspiration but a governance imperative.
Across Ghana, more women, especially young women, are organising, building capacity, and stepping into public life. Importantly, the national conversation is evolving.
The question is no longer whether women should participate, but how to dismantle the systems that constrain them.
Presence to power
Increasing numbers alone are not enough. Participation must translate into real influence.
Yet the cost of sustaining political presence remains high, with many elected officials expected to personally finance constituency needs.
In this environment, financial capacity often outweighs competence.
Addressing this requires deliberate and structured action:
• Enforce the Affirmative Action Act, particularly Section 14, to ensure minimum representation targets are met.
• Demonetise internal party elections by eliminating vote-buying and introducing transparent financing systems.
• Reform primary structures to reduce financial and procedural barriers.
• Challenge societal norms through sustained public education and media representation.
• Strengthen protections for candidates, especially ahead of the 2027 local elections.
Beyond policy reforms lies something more fundamental: belief.
The belief that women belong in political spaces, not as exceptions or symbolic inclusions, but as equal actors shaping Ghana’s future.
Women’s political participation is not a “women’s issue.”
It is a democratic issue. A system that quietly prices women out cannot fully represent its people.
If Ghana is to sustain its reputation as a model democracy, the next chapter must ensure that women are not just present, but powerful.
The writer is the Founder and Executive Director of the Gender Centre for Empowering Development (GenCED).
