Kojo Preko Dankwa criticises government over ‘24-hour market’ communication

Media journalist and broadcaster Kojo Preko Dankwa has criticised the government over what he describes as a major communication failure surrounding the implementation of the government’s 24-hour economy policy at the local level.

According to him, the government has failed to properly communicate to Ghanaians that some of the projects previously described as 24-hour markets are now being referred to as District Economy Markets.

Speaking on the matter, host of Kessben Maakye on Kessben TV and Kessben 92.9fm Accra, Kojo Preko Dankwa said the failure to clarify the policy from the beginning had created confusion among residents, particularly communities affected by the demolition of existing structures to make way for new market projects.

He questioned why the government and its communicators did not intervene earlier when the projects were being widely presented as 24-hour markets.

“You have failed when it comes to the communication of this matter,” he argued, questioning whether the government had failed to apply the principles of development communication to properly explain the policy to citizens.

Kojo Preko Dankwa said Members of Parliament, District Chief Executives and other government officials should have been properly equipped to explain to their constituents what was actually being constructed.

He argued that if the projects were always intended to be District Economy Markets, the government should have communicated that clearly instead of allowing the public to understand them as 24-hour markets for an extended period.

He also questioned whether the government was being reactive rather than proactive in its communication strategy.

According to him, the communication gap has become even more problematic because some communities are now witnessing the demolition of houses, schools, banks, existing markets and other structures to make way for the projects.

He said residents affected by the demolitions have raised concerns because, in some cases, the structures being destroyed have not been replaced before the communities are expected to accept the new developments.

Kojo Preko Dankwa cited the Two Face Market as an example, recalling assurances that the first phase would involve the expansion of the market, while a second phase would introduce additional infrastructure and services such as a fire station and clinic.

He questioned whether district and metropolitan assemblies had adequately engaged the affected communities to establish whether the proposed projects were suitable for their needs and whether the available structures would effectively serve the same communities.

The journalist further raised concerns about the demolition of schools.

He argued that where school buildings are considered defective or structurally unsafe and are therefore demolished, the government should ensure that they are properly replaced.

He said replacing a demolished school with a market without adequately addressing the educational needs of the affected community amounts to poor development communication and planning.

“ If there is a defect in school buildings and they are not proper, if the building is demolished, you have to replace it,” he said.

Kojo Preko Dankwa questioned the rationale behind demolishing existing community facilities when there is no clear indication of where replacement facilities will be located.

He also raised concerns about land availability, asking how the government intends to construct District Economy Markets in communities where adequate land has not been secured.

According to him, proper development communication requires government agencies to engage communities before projects are implemented rather than relying solely on government power or manifesto commitments.

He said residents should be informed about what is being built, why it is being built, where it will be located, how it will affect existing facilities and what benefits the community will receive.

Kojo Preko Dankwa also referred to earlier comments by Goosie Tanor, described as the head of the 24-hour economy communication structure, who had reportedly indicated months earlier that the 24-hour markets being constructed were not his initiative or projects under his department.

He questioned why the Ministry of Local Government, Chieftaincy Affairs and Religious Affairs and the government’s communication machinery did not respond clearly to such comments at the time.

“If you heard it, how did you not respond?” he questioned, arguing that the silence allowed the media, political opponents and ordinary citizens to form their own understanding of the projects.

For Kojo Preko Dankwa, the issue goes beyond the name attached to the markets and points to a broader failure in development communication.

He said government communication should have been used to explain the policy from the beginning, engage affected communities and prevent the confusion that has emerged over the projects.

He further questioned the financing and implementation of the projects, particularly in relation to allocations to district assemblies for the 2025/2026 period.

“If one DCE doesn’t explain properly what the market is supposed to be, then we have failed,” he said.

Kojo Preko Dankwa maintained that the government’s approach demonstrates a failure to properly communicate its development agenda to ordinary Ghanaians, particularly those directly affected by the projects.

He stressed that development should not only involve constructing physical infrastructure but must also include effective communication and meaningful engagement with the people who will live with the consequences of those projects.