Just when the hullabaloo of the NPP's parliamentary primaries and its aftermath in the Nandom Constituency of the Upper West Region appears to be dying out to pave the way for calm and unity, the party has taken a radical move that has the potential to further destabilise the party in the constituency.

The Regional Executive Committee of the party has axed two executives of the constituency from their positions per a letter in circulation.

The duo, perceived to be supporters of Alois Mohl who was disqualified from contesting the former Interior Minister, Ambrose Dery in the party's parliamentary primaries are said to have violated Article 7(24e) of the party's constitution due to their absence from more than six of the constituency executive committee meetings with no reason.

"On the 5th of February, 2024, the Regional Executive Committee received a report from the Nandom Constituency Committee on your inability to attend Constituency Executive Committee meetings for more than six (6) consecutive times without any reason.

"The Regional Executive Committee considering the report of the Constituency Executive Committee gave you the opportunity to appear before the Regional Executive Committee to enable them to make a pronouncement on the matter," the letter read in part.

This was contained in two separate letters dated February 16, 2024, and addressed to Patrick Napkenaah and Issah Langnee, who are the constituency youth organizer and vice chairman respectively, but for the mentioning of the portfolio that the person is being relieved of, the wording of the two letters remains the same.

Signed by the Regional Secretary, Tanko Daniel Dawda, the letters have been copied to the general secretary of the party as well as the chairperson of Nandom Constituency.

The letters added that members of the Regional Executive Committee reached a consensus and adopted the report by the Nandom Constituency Executive Committee having not been convinced by the responses of the two executives summoned.

"In considering the report and also your statement before the Regional Executive Committee, members of the Regional Executive Committee unanimously upheld recommendations of the report of Constituency Executive Committee," part of the letter read.

In Patrick Napkenaah's letter, it stated: "You therefore cease to be the Youth Organizer of the Nandom Constituency in line with Article 7(24e) of the constitution of the party".

"You therefore cease to be the 2nd Vice Chairman of the Nandom Constituency in line with Article 7(24e) of the constitution of the party", stated in Issah Langnee's letter.

Responding to this reporter in a telephone interview on Saturday, February 17, 2024, Dr. Tanko Daniel Dawda revealed that 18 executive members turned up for the said meeting out of 28 executive members.

He rubbished allegations suggesting that the decision the party took was taken by the Regional Chairman.

The NPP scribe described such claims as hearsay and admonished this reporter to stick to the public statement issued by the party.

He dared any executive of the party present during the meeting with a divergent view to come out publicly to say it.

"When I issued the statement, I said it was unanimous. So what does unanimous mean? Which are your sources? This's a public statement, if your sources...you should be relating to public statements not hearsay. We have put it out publicly.

"Then if somebody who was in the meeting disagrees with that decision, the person should also release a public statement and not that the person should go and sit because the persons he's sitting with people who don't agree with the decision, who think that the decision was bad and then he'll want to save his face there. Let the person come out publicly and I'll face the person as I have the records. I'll tell what the person said during the meeting," Dr. Tanko said.

"Pushed further as to what "unanimous" in the letters stand for since our impeccable sources indicated no voting took place among members but rather the decision was vetoed by the Regional Chairman who feared voting over the decision could have backfired", he added.

Patrick Napkenaah also spoke to this journalist on February 17, and he expressed his unhappiness over the development and claimed the decision taken against them was a mastermind of a handful of the executives with a vested interest.

According to him, apart from two occasions when they had to seek a change of date to suit their schedules after receiving invitations for meetings, there is no proof against them declining invitations for any meeting.

He reiterated his readiness to challenge the decision to seek justice and clear his name.