When Recognition Becomes Ridicule: Rethinking the Debate Over Honorary Academic Titles in Ghana

By Klutse Gamor

In recent weeks, Ghana’s academic space has been roiled by a heated debate following the Ghana Tertiary Education Commission’s (GTEC) directive that Mr. Richard Kofi Asiedu—CEO of the St. Andrew Group of Schools and a decorated education advocate—cease using the title “Professor.” At issue is his honorary professorship, conferred by the internationally accredited Alfred Nobel University of Ukraine, and whether such titles should be publicly used in a professional context.

GTEC argues that honorary titles are ceremonial and not equivalent to earned academic ranks based on peer-reviewed scholarship or faculty appointments. According to the Commission, presenting such titles without expressly labeling them as “honorary” misleads the public and threatens the integrity of Ghana’s academic institutions. Their ruling has reignited broader concerns over title inflation and perceived misuse by public figures across sectors.

But here’s the essential truth: an honorary title, conferred lawfully by a legitimate and accredited international institution, is not a fabrication—it is a global tradition of esteem.

Related Article

Five Core Rebuttals to the Criticism:

1. Legitimacy of the Conferring Institutions
   Alfred Nobel University and Universidad Azteca—both internationally recognized—formally conferred honorary degrees on Mr. Asiedu in recognition of his decades-long contribution to youth development, education access, and community leadership. These are not “fake schools”; they operate under legal charters and global academic protocols. To reduce their academic commendation to “fake” reveals a profound misunderstanding of higher education diplomacy and global recognition.
2. Intent and Representation Matter
   There is no evidence that Mr. Asiedu claimed to be a research professor, sought academic postings, or leveraged the title deceptively. His use of the designation “Professor” aligns with widespread cultural practices where honorary honorees are addressed respectfully without needing to qualify each mention. Dignitaries, statesmen, and education philanthropists across the globe receive and use such titles symbolically—as acknowledgments of service, not scholarly credentials.
3. GTEC’s Directive Lacks Policy Framework
   To date, GTEC has not issued public, transparent guidelines addressing the use of foreign honorary titles. Without such a framework, the Commission’s directive appears arbitrary, inconsistently applied, and devoid of due process. If Ghana is to maintain its academic integrity, it must also uphold fairness and consultative governance—not public castigation.
4. Willingness to Clarify, Not Capitulate
   The St. Andrew Group has expressed readiness to label the title “Honorary Professor” moving forward—an open gesture that balances clarity with dignity. But insisting that an honored public servant must disown a formally awarded title from an international university is both unreasonable and injurious to Ghana’s standing in global academic networks.
5. Respectful Discourse Over Dismissive Rhetoric
   That a public official would refer to an international university’s honorary commendation as “fake” is not merely disrespectful—it is diplomatically reckless. It undermines Ghana’s academic credibility far more than any title ever could. Learning, by definition, includes understanding the traditions of recognition and honor. Insults do not elevate academic discourse; they diminish it.

Final Thought:
If Ghana is to preserve both its academic dignity and democratic ethos, it must balance rigor with respect. Titles may not define a person—but how we handle them reveals the soul of our institutions. Mr. Asiedu’s decades of work cannot be erased by one directive. Nor can the global tradition of honoring distinguished service be nullified by local misinterpretation. Let’s raise the bar—not the pitchforks.