Celebrated by the Citizens, Rejected by Those He Represents: Where It All Went Wrong for IGP Dampare

Ghanafeed broke the news yesterday that Inspector General of Police (IGP) Dr. George Akuffo Dampare has been relieved of his duties. His removal, now made officicial by the communications bureau of the Presidency, came just three years into his tenure, and marks the end of a leadership era that was as celebrated by the public as it was controversial within the ranks of the police service. Dr. Dampare’s story is one of paradoxes: a man adored by the citizens he served but rejected by the very institution he led. So, where did it all go wrong?

The People’s IGP

To the average Ghanaian, Dr. Dampare was a breath of fresh air. His appointment in 2021 brought with it a wave of optimism and a promise of reform. Under his leadership, the Ghana Police Service underwent significant changes aimed at improving professionalism, accountability, and public trust. He introduced technology-driven solutions, championed community policing initiatives, and cracked down on misconduct within the service.

One of his most notable achievements was the empowerment of the Police Intelligence and Professional Standards Bureau (PIPS). Under Dampare, PIPS became a formidable force, instilling fear in officers who dared to abuse their power. For the first time in a long while, Ghanaians felt they had a recourse when dealing with unprofessional behavior from the police. A simple mention of PIPS was enough to make even the most arrogant officer sit up straight.

To the public, Dampare was a disciplinarian, a reformer, and a symbol of hope. His no-nonsense approach to policing resonated with citizens who had grown weary of corruption and inefficiency within the service. If a vote were held among the people, it’s safe to say Dampare would have secured no less than 70% approval.

The Police’s Outcast

But while the citizens celebrated him, the police force he led was far less enthusiastic. Within the ranks, Dampare was a polarizing figure. If his fate had been decided by a vote among police officers, he would have been lucky to secure 30% support. The reasons for this internal rejection are as complex as they are telling.

At the heart of the discontent were issues of promotion and career progression, among others. Under Dampare’s administration, the once-clear path to promotion became murky. Officers who had marked time and met all the necessary criteria found themselves inexplicably passed over, while others, seemingly favored by the system, leapfrogged ahead. The perception of favoritism and a lack of transparency in promotions created a deep sense of frustration and disillusionment among the rank and file.

Additionally, Dampare’s centralized approach to decision-making alienated many. Divisional commanders were stripped of their authority to speak to the media, with all communications funneled through the national headquarters. This top-down management style left many officers feeling sidelined and powerless.

Perhaps most damaging was the lack of freedom within the service. Officers felt stifled, unable to voice their concerns or challenge decisions without fear of reprisal. For many, Dampare became the face of these grievances—a leader who prioritized public perception over the welfare of his own men and women.

The Impossible Balancing Act

The question then arises: who should an IGP serve—the people or the police? In an ideal world, the two would go hand in hand. But in Dampare’s case, they were often at odds. His reforms, while popular with the public, created friction within the service. His emphasis on discipline and accountability, though necessary, was perceived as heavy-handed and exclusionary by those within the force.

Dampare’s tenure highlights the inherent tension in leadership roles that straddle public expectation and institutional loyalty. While the citizens wanted a police service that was transparent, efficient, and accountable, the officers wanted a leader who prioritized their career progression, autonomy, and morale. Dampare’s inability to reconcile these two competing demands ultimately led to his downfall.

The Legacy of Dampare

As Dr. Dampare exits the stage, his legacy remains a subject of debate. To the public, he will be remembered as a reformer who brought much-needed discipline to the police service. To the police, he may be seen as a leader who failed to address their internal concerns.

His removal raises important questions about the future of policing in Ghana. Should the next IGP focus on satisfying the citizens or the police? Can the two ever be aligned? And perhaps most importantly, how can the Ghana Police Service strike a balance between public trust and internal cohesion?

One thing is clear: Dampare’s tenure has set a precedent. The next IGP will inherit a service that has tasted reform but remains hungry for fairness, transparency, and unity. Whether the new leadership can build on Dampare’s achievements while addressing the grievances of the rank and file remains to be seen.

For now, Dr. Dampare’s story serves as a cautionary tale—a reminder that even the most celebrated leaders can fall if they fail to bridge the gap between the people they serve and the institution they represent.

Source: GhanaFeed.Com