NPP Demands President Apologise Or Sack Education Minister Over Arabic, Chinese Curriculum Controversy

The New Patriotic Party (NPP) has called on President John Mahama to either apologise to the nation or sack his Minister for Education, Hon. Haruna Iddrisu, over what it describes as a grave contradiction in government on the introduction of Arabic and Chinese languages into Ghanaian schools.

In a statement dated September 16, 2026, and issued by its Education Sector Policy Committee through the Policy Secretariat, the NPP said the entire nation was shocked last week when the President repudiated his Education Minister and categorically denied that any policy to introduce Arabic and Chinese into Ghanaian schools had been approved by him or his Cabinet, insisting there was “absolutely no new policy” and asking the public to regard the matter as settled.

According to the party, far from settling the issue, the President’s statement exposed a contradiction at the heart of his Government.

It said the President now has only two credible options: if the Minister announced and pursued the policy without presidential and Cabinet approval, the President must sack him, but if the Minister acted with the authority or knowledge of the President or Cabinet, then the President must apologise to Ghanaians for denying a policy his Government had already set in motion.

The NPP recalled that before the President spoke, the Minister had publicly declared five months ago, on Thursday, April 24, that Chinese and Arabic would become compulsory foreign languages at the secondary school level and linked that new policy directly to the President’s own vision for education.

The party said Hon. Haruna Iddrisu gave ownership of that policy to his boss and that the President and his Office could not have been oblivious to that major news item and the controversy it generated.

The statement said, nevertheless, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NaCCA) was then instructed by the Ministry to undertake the associated curriculum work.

The review, it noted, engaged about 160 writers and reviewers over several months and produced a revised curriculum that included Arabic and Chinese among the foreign-language options.

On 22 July 2026, the revised curriculum was presented to the Minister, who did not reject it or suggest that NaCCA had acted without authority, but instead referred it to the Ghana Education Service and directed GES to bring it to “full implementation readiness”, take early ownership and prepare for smooth classroom execution.

When questions later arose about the revised basic school curriculum, the NPP said Government clarified only that Chinese and Arabic would be optional at the basic school level, a clarification which did not withdraw or explain the Minister’s earlier statement that they would be compulsory at the secondary school level. On 3 September 2026, NaCCA, with support from the Confucius Institute at the University of Cape Coast, trained teachers to implement the new Chinese language curriculum.

To the public, the NPP argued, these were legitimate acts of Government, noting that the public is not part of Cabinet and cannot be expected to know what had or had not been approved behind closed doors. When a Minister responsible for education publicly attributes a policy direction to the President and advances it through institutions under his authority, the reasonable conclusion is that he is acting with the authority of Government.

The party said the President’s subsequent declaration that there was “absolutely no new policy” therefore leaves a serious contradiction and raises issues about policy coordination and legitimacy at the Executive level.

It questioned public expenditure on the process, asking that if there was “absolutely no new policy”, why public resources were committed to developing the curricula, preparing the system for implementation and training teachers, and who takes responsibility for that expenditure.

The NPP said the issue now goes beyond the curriculum controversy, arguing that if the Minister could publicly announce a major policy direction, attribute it to the President, commit public institutions and resources to its development and move it towards implementation without the necessary approval, the public is entitled to ask what other decisions he or other Ministers may be taking without the required authority.

“The President cannot have it both ways. A Minister whose major policy pronouncements are subsequently disowned by the President cannot continue to command the confidence required to lead such an important sector,” the statement said.

Click to read more: https://opemsuo.com/author/hajara-fuseini/