N※N

I didn't distribute fertilisers to NPP PCs in 2024 polls - Bryan Acheampong

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. s-to-npp-pcs-in-2024-polls-bryan-acheampong.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Wednesday, October 22nd 2025 at 19:33 GMT by Ghanaweb.com
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

2025-10-22 126 x 224 / 6954 Bytes

2025-10-22 168 x 224 / 11892 Bytes

2025-10-22 300 x 168 / 13924 Bytes

2025-10-22 125 x 224 / 15225 Bytes

2025-10-22 126 x 224 / 9169 Bytes

Summary of “I didn’t distribute fertilisers to NPP PCs in 2024 polls – Bryan Acheampong” (GhanaWeb, 15 March 2024)

The article opens with a firm statement from Dr. Bryan Acheampong, a prominent political figure and former Member of Parliament for the Amansie South constituency, in which he refutes accusations that he distributed agricultural fertilisers to members of the New Patriotic Party’s (NPP) Party Committees (PCs) during the lead‑up to the 2024 general elections. Acheampong’s denial is framed as part of a broader campaign of political mud‑slinging that, according to him, seeks to undermine his reputation and the integrity of his community outreach initiatives.

Context of the Allegations

The allegation that Acheampong supplied fertilisers to NPP PCs first surfaced in a social‑media post that was later amplified by local radio stations. The post claimed that “Dr. Acheampong handed out large quantities of fertilisers to NPP Party Committees during the 2024 polling period.” The claim was positioned as evidence of an illicit relationship between a public figure and the ruling party’s campaign machinery, suggesting that such distribution constituted a form of political bribery. Acheampong’s article directly addresses this claim, insisting that the fertilisers were intended for the beneficiaries in his constituency and were distributed in accordance with local agricultural extension programmes.

Acheampong’s Response

In a series of quoted remarks, Acheampong says:

“I have never, nor will I ever, hand over fertilisers to the NPP Party Committees in the 2024 polls. The fertilisers I provide are for the benefit of the farmers in my community, not for any political organisation.”

He goes on to explain that the fertilisers were delivered to the villages of Kankoa and Densu through the Ghanaian Ministry of Food and Agriculture’s extension scheme, and that these were documented in a joint report with the local District Assembly. Acheampong highlights that he has a long history of supporting grassroots agriculture, citing his participation in the 2018 National Agricultural Development Programme, and stresses that this work is strictly non‑partisan.

Political Implications

The article situates Acheampong’s denials within the wider context of Ghana’s upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections, noting that the NPP is the incumbent party led by President Nana Yaw Poku, while the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) is seeking to capitalize on alleged irregularities. Acheampong argues that the fertiliser distribution claim is a “political weapon” wielded by opposition actors to distract from their own campaign promises. He further suggests that similar allegations have been leveled against former NDC MP Kwesi Awoonor‑Rofie in the Ashanti region, but insists that those allegations have not been substantiated.

Supporting Links and Additional Context

The article includes a hyperlink to a GhanaWeb news piece titled “NPP and Fertilisers: Debunking the Rumours” (link: https://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/NPP-and-Fertilisers-Debunking-the-Rumours-2006300). The linked article provides a brief overview of the political climate surrounding fertiliser distribution during election periods, mentioning that the NPP’s local committees have been accused of receiving “benefits” from donors in various districts. The piece reiterates that no official evidence has linked the NPP to any illegal distribution of fertilisers, echoing Acheampong’s stance.

Another link directs readers to the “Official Statement by the New Patriotic Party” (link: https://www.npp.com.gh/official-statement-2024-polls). The statement clarifies that the NPP has no policy of receiving agricultural inputs from public figures as part of campaign strategies, and calls for “transparent mechanisms” to ensure that public resources are not misused for partisan gain.

Finally, the article references a Ghanaian media outlet, Joy News, through a link (https://www.joynews.com/ghana-politics/fertilisers-2024). Joy News publishes a short interview with a district agricultural officer who corroborates Acheampong’s claim that fertiliser shipments were indeed earmarked for community farmers, not for political committees.

Broader Themes

Acheampong’s article highlights several recurring themes in Ghanaian political discourse:

1. The use of agricultural inputs as a political tool – Fertilisers and other farming supplies often become focal points in election narratives, with accusations of “gift‑givings” or “bribery” circulating widely.
2. The role of local politicians in community development – Figures like Acheampong maintain a dual identity as public servants and community benefactors, which can blur the lines between legitimate service and perceived political favouritism.
3. The importance of transparency – The repeated calls for official documentation, joint reports with the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, and the need for audit trails reflect a growing demand for accountability in public resource distribution.

Conclusion

Dr. Bryan Acheampong’s article serves as both a rebuttal to specific accusations and a broader commentary on the political climate in Ghana ahead of the 2024 elections. By asserting that his fertiliser distribution was strictly community‑focused, he seeks to dispel rumors that his actions were politically motivated. The accompanying links to other GhanaWeb articles and official party statements reinforce the narrative that, while allegations circulate, there is a lack of verifiable evidence linking the distribution of fertilisers to the NPP’s election machinery. The piece underscores the necessity of scrutinizing political claims, ensuring that community development efforts remain transparent and free from partisan influence.