Historian Yaw Anokye Frimpong accuses Prof. Aaron Mike Oquaye of distorting Ghanaian history while teaching at the University of Ghana. He claims Oquaye’s political bias led to inaccuracies regarding historical figures like Kwame Nkrumah. Oquaye, in contrast, emphasizes the NPP’s role in advancing democracy and human rights, criticizing Nkrumah’s policies.
Historian and lawyer Yaw Anokye Frimpong has accused former Speaker of Parliament, Prof. Aaron Mike Oquaye, of distorting historical truths during his tenure as a lecturer at the University of Ghana. According to Frimpong, who took Political Science classes with Prof. Oquaye, there was significant discord in the classroom due to the professor’s perceived political bias.
Frimpong alleged that Prof. Oquaye misrepresented historical facts to reflect his political perspective, leading to conflicts with students who were knowledgeable about Ghana’s history. “He taught me political science. At the time, he was Dr. Mike Oquaye, and there was always conflict in his class because his course focused on politics in Ghana, yet he twisted historical facts to fit his narrative,” Frimpong stated.
He further criticized Prof. Oquaye’s portrayal of the contribution of businessman George Alfred “Paa” Grant, who financially supported Kwame Nkrumah’s return to Ghana. Frimpong asserted, “The £100 that was used to bring Nkrumah to Ghana was given by Paa Grant, but Mike Oquaye would tell us that it was JB Danquah, even though Danquah was a lawyer who didn’t have that kind of money.”
In contrast, Prof. Oquaye has maintained that the New Patriotic Party (NPP) played a pivotal role in securing Ghana’s freedom and democracy. Speaking at an event organized by the NPP Council of Elders, he highlighted the importance of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition in safeguarding human rights within the country’s constitutional framework.
Prof. Oquaye criticized Nkrumah’s record, stating that during his leadership, human rights protections were inadequate, a situation that improved only under the NPP’s governance. “Under Nkrumah, you could be detained almost indefinitely. The Preventive Detention Act (PDA) of 1958 allowed for detention for five years. In 1964, he amended it to allow for a renewal of another five years, making it almost indefinite,” he explained, arguing that Nkrumah’s oppressive policies contradict his heroic status today.
Amidst ongoing discussions about Ghana’s history, Prof. Oquaye urged fellow citizens to acknowledge the contributions of the NPP and emphasized, “If you love your freedom, you must love the NPP. Our people were developmental, selfless gentlemen, focused on progress.”
Additionally, there are ongoing conversations regarding the historical significance of the return of Kwame Nkrumah’s bronze statue’s head after 43 years, highlighting the complexity of Ghana’s historical narrative.
The accusations against Prof. Aaron Mike Oquaye by Yaw Anokye Frimpong draw attention to the contentious nature of political history interpretation in Ghana. Frimpong’s criticisms suggest a perceived bias in Oquaye’s teachings, particularly regarding the legacy of Kwame Nkrumah. Conversely, Oquaye maintains a narrative that credits the New Patriotic Party with significant advancements in Ghana’s democratic and human rights landscape. This dispute reflects broader debates about historical representation and national identity in Ghana.
Original Source: www.ghanaweb.com
