In Ghana, several key institutions bear the names of prominent national figures. For example, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology honors Ghana's first president, while Simon Diedong Dombo University of Business and Integrated Development Studies and Akenten Appiah-Menka University of Skills Training and Entrepreneurial Development also carry the names of notable figures.

Similarly, Kotoka International Airport, Baba Yara Sports Stadium, and Aliu Mahama Sports Stadium are named after prominent individuals. There are also roundabouts and interchanges such as Obetsebi Lamptey Roundabout, Nkrumah Circle, Danquah Circle, and Ako Adjei Interchange, etc., named after prominent individuals. Recently, there has been news of a sector minister tasked with submitting a bill to parliament for additional name changes.

While naming institutions, public places, and national monuments after influential Ghanaians are intended to honor their contributions, this practice comes with significant risks. Though the suggestion here is not to entirely abandon this tradition, we believe it should be approached with careful thought and reflection. Thus, public perception is fluid, and an individual celebrated today may face criticism in the future as societal values shift. A figure who is revered in one generation might be reassessed or even condemned in another, as historical interpretations evolve over time.

In other words, reputation, much like societal values, changes over time. As new generations emerge, their understanding of the past and their priorities often lead to reevaluations of historical figures. A person praised for their leadership or service might later be criticized for previously overlooked actions. For example, leaders who are once celebrated for their role in nation-building may later be scrutinized for their involvement in controversial decisions or policies.

Moreover, values that were once seen as virtuous might now be perceived as problematic. A leader who was once hailed for their commitment to certain ideals could, in retrospect, be criticized for espousing views that are now seen as discriminatory or outdated. As Ghana continues to reflect on its history and the legacies of its political figures, these evolving perceptions present challenges in cementing an individual's legacy through the naming of public institutions and public places.

Another significant concern is the risk of political bias. Naming public institutions after political figures can lead to the politicization of these spaces. It may create an environment where loyalty to a particular leader or ideology takes precedence over the institution’s core mission. This has the potential to undermine academic freedom and foster division, as individuals affiliated with different political factions may feel marginalized. For example, a university named after a prominent political figure might inadvertently alienate members of the academic community who do not share the same political beliefs.

Furthermore, naming institutions after individuals can oversimplify or erase the more controversial aspects of their legacies. Many figures who have contributed positively to the nation have also made mistakes or held views that may not align with contemporary values. By naming institutions, places, and monuments after them, there is a risk of whitewashing these complexities, leaving future generations with an incomplete understanding of their contributions. In Ghana, where the nation continues to grapple with its post-colonial identity and history, it is important to ensure that such naming practices do not obscure the full narrative of its leaders.

Ghana can learn valuable lessons from recent debates in other parts of the world about the renaming of public institutions and the removal of statues. These debates underscore the potential dangers of perpetuating divisive historical narratives through public monuments, places or institutional names. As Ghana continues to develop and reflect on its history, it is essential to carefully consider how its institutions and public places are named, ensuring that the individuals honored do not reflect outdated or problematic values.

Given these risks, it is crucial that Ghana approaches the practice of naming institutions, public places, and monuments after individuals with caution. While it is important to honor those who have made significant contributions to the nation, it is equally important to ensure that these honors do not become sources of division or controversy as society’s values shift. Naming institutions after individuals can freeze their reputations in a way that may not reflect the evolving standards and interpretations of future generations.

A more thoughtful and balanced approach is needed. Rather than focusing solely on the positive aspects of an individual’s legacy, it is crucial to consider their full impact on society. This holistic view can help avoid the oversimplification of complex histories. Additionally, Ghana might consider alternative naming practices that celebrate universal values, historical events, or concepts that reflect the aspirations of the nation as a whole (for e.g., Black Star Square and University of Ghana), rather than focusing solely on individual figures.

In conclusion, while naming institutions after individuals is often well-intentioned, it carries inherent risks. By taking a more critical and nuanced approach, Ghana can ensure that its institutions remain aligned with the evolving values of its society, promoting unity, inclusivity, and a more accurate reflection of history. This careful consideration will help preserve the integrity of public spaces and institutions, ensuring that they serve the collective good and reflect the nation's ongoing journey toward knowledge, justice, and progress.

Robert Opoku, PhD

An Academic and Public Advocate

Canada