Re BOOK ALERT: 
Welcome
....to JusticeGhana Group
JusticeGhana is a Non-Governmental [and-not-for- profit] Organization (NGO) with a strong belief in Justice, Security and Progress....” More Details
JusticeGhana NewsArchives
Parliament of Ghana; Quo vadis? – Prof. Mike Oquaye
- Details
- Parent Category: Main
- Category: Briefs & Memos
- Created on Wednesday, 16 July 2014 00:00
- Hits: 4645
Parliament of Ghana; Quo vadis? – Prof. Mike Oquaye
On Monday 14th July 2014, the Majority in Parliament voted against a Motion requesting Parliament to investigate events surrounding Ghana’s football fiasco in Brazil. We witnessed a further sinking of the image of the Parliament of Ghana. The cause does not lie in the Stars! Who really is to blame? The answer is clear – ALL OF US. The malady rests deeply seated in our Constitution. It is the HYBRID Constitution which allows appointments of Ministers from Parliament.
This provision essentially fuses the Executive and the Legislature in a pitiful osmosis whereby the Executive (the stronger body) eats up Parliament (the weaker body). There can NEVER be a meaningful Parliamentary oversight over the Executive in this Republic under the present Constitutional arrangement. We engage in wishful thinking of “gargantuan” proportion if we think otherwise.
{sidebar id=10 align=right}Hon. Mahama Ayariga argued that once the President had set up a Committee of Enquiry into the same matter, Parliament was estopped. What law guided him in this submission, only he knows! Indeed the Executive has exhibited absolute bad faith in the matter. It is tragic how pre-conceived political prejudices can cloud every good judgment. Indeed the Speaker himself showed he was appalled.
On Monday 9 July, Hon. Ayariga told Parliament that an administrative enquiry had been set up by government and it would report in 30 days. At this time, the Motion for Parliament to investigate the matter was filed by Hon. Isaac Asiamah. Then stealthily, the President set up a Commission to investigate the same matter while Parliament was considering it. The Minister then came to argue that if the President had set up a Committee to investigate, then Parliament cannot proceed.
If this jingoistic politics continues, Parliament can NEVER do its oversight work. You are supposed to OVERSEE another’s work. But anytime you take steps to enquire into his activities, he also sets up some Committee and then your own members rally round the other person and shout: “we are estopped!” This is a pity.
Article 103 of the Constitution gives the Parliament of Ghana full powers to “appoint Standing Committees and other Committees as may be necessary for the effective discharge of its functions”. A Committee appointed by Parliament “shall have the powers, rights and privileges of the High Court”. Let everyone who cares to know be told that this inquisitorial or investigative power of Parliament extends from Archaeology to Zoology and encompasses any matter of interest or concern to Ghanaians and includes any act or omission of even the President. When MPs meet, the whole Ghana has met.
The football saga in Brazil is a matter of grave concern to all Ghanaians. Parliament is the assembly of ALL Ghanaians. Yet the Majority in Parliament says it will not and cannot enquire into it. Indeed, Ghana is a sad place to live at a time like this.
Our hybrid Constitution must be changed. It weakens the Legislature vis-à-vis the Executive. In the first place, the oversight role of Parliament is undermined. MPs who are also Ministers cannot ask colleague Ministers questions on the floor of the House as expected. Notably, the Minister/MPs lead, control, direct and influence the other MPs on the majority side. Furthermore, ministers owe collective responsibility for all government decisions and cannot, therefore, criticise the government on the floor of the House. An MP, once elected, owes his/her constituents deliberative and representational duties by standing in their stead in the House. Prior commitment to the executive authority of the State undermines this basic duty.
Second, it has become the norm that majority side MPs look forward to the President for ministerial appointments. The “successful” and “leading” MPs are perceived as those who catch the eye of the President and are made ministers and not those who perform excellently as Legislators and constantly catch the eye of the Speaker. Indeed, once appointed, a Minister moves to the front benches and he/she moves back when he/she loses his/her ministerial position. Even in the sitting arrangement, Executive dominance is pervasive. No wonder there is very little ambition for Legislators to develop and achieve great heights as known in the US system.
In the US, through the Committee and other Senatorial Hearings, inquisitorial processes of the highest order are held with autonomy, authority and assertiveness. This constitutes the bedrock of the oversight role of the US Legislature. Parliament should be a House of Inquisition. But you can never have this under our hybrid arrangement.
Lindberg, a famous political scientist, wrote of Ghana after careful research:
“The MPs rarely use the investigative power of parliamentary committees to probe into the implementation of enacted bills or into matters of malfeasance. MPs seem not to consider the full options available to them and tend to use primarily the option of filing questions to ministers in exercising oversight responsibilities. Questions typically concern constituency matters such as when a particular road will be completed, or what the minister has done to ensure this or that village will get a new school building, rather than national policy. While important matters of local development are useful, these question and answer sessions fail to fulfill the mandate of the legislature to require transparency and accountability from the executive on implementation of major policy programs”. This is a serious indictment on Ghana.
Our vote of censure provision in the 1992 Constitution is another joke. Article 82 provides that by a two-third majority of its members, Parliament can pass a vote of censure on a Minister of State. But Article 82 Clause 5 provides: “where a vote of censure is passed against a Minister under this Article, the President may, unless the Minister resigns his office, revoke his appointment as Minister”. If the President does not revoke, Parliament labours in vain. In the light of this, Parliament is a toothless bull dog and the Executive reigns supreme. Are we serious?
We should employ constitutional engineering to ensure that our members of Parliament are free to vote as in the US. We will refer to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia in this connection: “Members of the U.S. Congress are generally elected from one of two parties, but its members are free to vote according to their own conscience or that of their constituents”. When shall we get there?
We should amend the Constitution to specifically provide against Members of the Legislature taking up any positions on Boards or other public position offered by the Executive. This practice creates a conflict of interest situation, undermines the oversight role of MPs over the Executive and provides the tempting carrots for which Parliament plays into the strangulating arms of the Executive.
Finally, it is recommended that Parliament’s tenure be changed to five years and a two-year gap provided between Parliament and the Executive. The latter’s tenure should remain four years.
We should change our ways before we totally destroy our nation. Ghana has strangulated accountability. “Create, loot and share” will continue to haunt us. The Executive plunders with impunity and the Legislature gleefully turns the blind eye.
Source: Prof. Mike Oquaye
No commentsMahama to swear in new ECOWAS judges
- Details
- Parent Category: Main
- Category: Briefs & Memos
- Created on Wednesday, 18 June 2014 00:00
- Hits: 5697
Mahama to swear in new ECOWAS judges
Seven newly-appointed Judges for the ECOWAS Court will be sworn-in by President John Dramani Mahama, Chairman of the Authority of Heads of State and Government of the ECOWAS on Wednesday, June 18, in Accra.
This follows the retirement of six Members of the Community Court of Justice, Economic Community of West Africa States (ECOWAS), at the Seat of the Court in Abuja, Nigeria, a release signed by Ms Elohor Ovadje, Information Officer, ECOWAS Court and copied to the Ghana News Agency said on Tuesday.
The Community Court of Justice (ECOWAS) has therefore held a valedictory court session in honour of the six retiring judges.
The Judges are Justice Awa Nana Daboya (Togo), President of the Court and pioneer Judge; Justice Benfeito Mosso Ramos (Cape Verde), Vice-President of the Court; Justice Hansine Donli (Nigeria), Dean of the Court and pioneer Judge; Justice Anthony Benin (Ghana), Member of the Court and a pioneer Judge; as well as Justice Clotilde Nougbode Medegan (Benin), Member of the Court; and Justice Eliam Potey (Cote D’Ivoire), Member of the Court.
The release said at a farewell ceremony, Mr. Tony Anene-Maidoh, Chief Registrar of the Court, thanked the retiring Judges for their contributions to the growth and advancement of the Court and made reference to the remarkable Decisions of the Court that had earned it a place on the world map.
Mr Anene-Maidoh said the greatest achievement of the Court during their tenure lies in the profundity of its jurisprudence and that though the primary mandate of the Court was the interpretation and application of ECOWAS Community Text, the Court has been recognized for its Human Rights jurisprudence.
At the ceremony was Mr. Mohammed Bello Adoke, Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Nigeria, and the President of the Nigerian Bar Association, among other dignitaries, whose valedictory message was delivered by Mr. Adebola Odugbesan, commending the retiring Judges and acknowledging the Court’s steadfastness in executing its mandates especially that of safeguarding and protecting human rights of the Community citizens.
The address of the President of the ECOWAS Commission was delivered by the Commissioner for Macroeconomic Policy and Research, ECOWAS Commission.
Justice Awa Nana Daboya, President of the Court, expressed gratitude to the founding fathers of ECOWAS for instituting the Court.
She made mention of the developmental stages of the Court, as well as challenges that had to be surmounted by the pioneer Judges at the inception of the Court in 2001.
Nana Daboya urged the Member-States to uphold the Court, and work assiduously towards the realization of vision 2020, of moving from ECOWAS of States to ECOWAS of people.
Justice Hansine Donli, Dean of the Court, stated that the idea of establishing the Community Court of Justice, ECOWAS was first conceived by the founding fathers of ECOWAS, and that the plan continued till the enactment of its first Protocol in 1991.
She added that the Court only became functional with the swearing in of the first set of seven Judges on January 30, 2001 in Bamako, Mali by the then Chairman of the Authority of Heads of State and Government of the ECOWAS, President Alpha Oumar Konare.
While extending best wishes for a successful tenure to the in-coming Judges, she advised members of staff of the Court, to continue to work diligently, and as a team, towards the achievement of the goals of the Court and the Community.
Justice Eliam Potey, an out-going Member of the Court, in his valedictory remark, stated that though the Judges of the Community Court are citizens of various Member States, they were appointed as independent Judges of the Community. He enjoined the Member States and Institutions to support the development of the Community Law.
Mr. Siratoulahi Gnamou, Head of Administration and Human Resources, ECOWAS Court, extended the gratitude of the members of staff of the Court to the retiring Judges for their contributions and realization of numerous developmental initiatives, notably the conception and implementation of programmes geared towards increasing visibility for the Court, and the promotion and consolidation of Community Law in the region.
Source: GNA
Nana Konadu confirms receipt of $4m judgement debt
- Details
- Parent Category: Main
- Category: Briefs & Memos
- Created on Tuesday, 10 June 2014 00:00
- Hits: 5488
Nana Konadu confirms receipt of $4m judgement debt
Former First Lady, Nana Konadu Agyemang-Rawlings, yesterday appeared before the Commission of Enquiry investigating the payment of judgement debts to testify in the case in which her company was given $4,150, 27.50 as judgement debt.
She confirmed the payment to Calf Cocoa International, which is partly owned by Carridem Development Company Limited, the investment wing of the 31st December Women's Movement (DWM) of which she is the president, and China International Corporation Company, but insisted that the amount paid was in Cedis and not dollars.
Tony Lithur, who had represented Calf Cocoa in court, had told the Sole Commission that he secured $4.15 million for the company because the government at the time refused to release about $2.6 million to Calf Cocoa for its operations.
Interestingly, Nana Konadu went to the com-mission with a different lawyer - sidelining Tony Lithur, who secured the judgement debt for her.
Testimony
When the case, entitled 'The CEO, Calf Cocoa Inter-national versus the Attorney General' was called yesterday, Mrs. Rawlings mounted the witness box alongside her lawyer, George Bernard Shaw.
She told Sole Commissioner Justice Yaw Apau of the Court of Appeal that Carridem decided to go into the manufacturing of cocoa and subsequently had assistance from the government of China.
Mrs. Rawlings said Calf Cocoa was then given con-cessionary loan by the Chinese adding, "So we started Calf Cocoa in 1996 or 1997, -acquiring the land and everything. The shareholding was 49 percent for my organisation and 51 percent for the Chinese company brought to us by their government.
"We acquired this con-cessionary loan and we were supposed to take it in bits. Whenever we needed funds for the project we wrote to the Ministry of Finance and they gave us the amount that was requested for," she said.
The Problem
Nana Konadu articulated, "Sometime in 2002, we wrote to the ministry informing them that we had completed everything and we would like to start the project in 2003. It was at that time that we started having problems of who owned the company."
She maintained, "Politics unfortunately came to play in this project and it was difficult to get the money. From 2003 when we were supposed to have started manufacturing cocoa powder, cocoa cake and cocoa butter, it was impossible to start."
She said when things got out of hand, "The Chinese sort of pulled out because they said there was too much political interference," adding, "We decided to go to court to fight the case in 2005 and judgement was delivered in 2008."
According to the former First Lady, the government appealed against the case but lost against Calf Cocoa and in 2009 "we could actually go to the premises again."
She posited that in the process, facilities in the company deteriorated and water and electricity discon-nected, making refurbishment of the place very expensive.
Sabotage
Dometi Kofi Sorkpor, counsel for the commission, asked Nana Konadu if it was "this unnecessary inter-ference" from the government that resulted in the truncation of the project, and she said "absolutely, it has been so."
"From 2002 when the problem started, it has not stopped. It carried through to the new government of 2009 and it is carrying through in the government of today. I don't know whether they really want to let this place function so that we can employ the 2800 people that this factory can employ," Nana Konadu averred.
Justice Apau also enquired from her what was stopping the Chinese from continuing with the project since judgement had already been obtained and she replied that "they have given us option to sell their shares. I think they are not comfortable with what is going on."
According to her, "We tried on a number of occasions to get certain loans for the project but the banks have not been coming forth either. There was a huge amount that they said was going to be given to companies in cocoa production so we also applied to ADB. I know that some companies were given $8 million, $10 million and so on but till date our document has not even been processed."
Mrs. Rawlings added, "We have a new business plan. We are doing the grounds work. Two companies we contacted say they want to wait for the economy to get better before they can invest in the country."
Source: Daily Guide
Justice delivery system has sunk to dangerously low levels - GBA
- Details
- Parent Category: Main
- Category: Briefs & Memos
- Created on Wednesday, 18 June 2014 00:00
- Hits: 4210
Justice delivery system has sunk to dangerously low levels - GBA
The Ghana Bar Association says it is appalled by the degrading and inhuman conditions under which judges of the High Court and District Court have been made to work and live.
The National Executives of the Association after their annual tour of the regions said the "sorry conditions" of the residences and offices of the judges do not augur well for justice delivery in the country.
In a statement issued and jointly signed by National President and Secretary of the GBA Nene Amegatcher and Justin Amenuvor respectively, described the living conditions of the judges as follows;
"There were damaged doors, windows, ceiling, tiles, leaking roofs, broken sewage cisterns. The houses were in a state of disrepair which does not befit the residence of members of judicial arm of government. In other places, reptiles crept into the judicial bungalows because of the overgrown environment."
The working conditions of the judges were no different, the GBA statement said.
"There were cracked walls, leaking roofs, poor sanitation, lack of running water, broken down airconditioners and infrastructure.
The situation, according to the GBA, is attributed to government's failure to release funds for the maintenance and upkeep of the judges.
The GBA lamented that judges have to virtually go on their knees to beg government to pay statutory funds which have been in arrears in for over a year now.
Such must not be the plight of an important arm of government like the judiciary, the statement hinted.
The combined effect of these poor living and working conditions have negatively affected justice delivery in the country, the statement contended.
Source: Myjoyonline.com|Nathan Gadugah
Woyome: Kufuor interfered with bidding process for CAN 2008 stadia construction
- Details
- Parent Category: Main
- Category: Briefs & Memos
- Created on Tuesday, 10 June 2014 00:00
- Hits: 5578
Woyome: Kufuor interfered with bidding process for CAN 2008 stadia construction
Businessman Alfred Agbesi Woyome on Monday said that former President J. A. Kufuor interfered with the bidding process for stadia construction for the CAN 2008 tournament.
As a result of the interference, Woyome said, Shanghai Construction Group won the bid for the construction of stadia at Essipon and Tamale.
Testifying in his GH¢51.2 million criminal case, Woyome told the Financial Division of the High Court that although the bidding process had ended and his company had won the bid for the construction of the stadia, the procurement process was sidestepped to give the Chinese company undue advantage.
Slamming the cancellation of his contract, Woyome disclosed that Shanghai’s earlier quotation of $18 million as being the cost of constructing each stadium was “not realistic” and false because a memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed between the government and the Chinese company quoted $38 million as the cost for constructing each stadium.
He supported his claim of what he termed “interference” on the part of former President ICufuor, with a Cabinet memo signed by a former Minister of Education and Sports, Mr Yaw Osafo-Marfo, and dated July 27,2005.
Snippets of the memo
The MoU, which has been tendered in evidence, stated, among other issues, that President Kufuor had expressed the eagerness to ensure the take-off of the project in good time and at a very competitive cost.
It said the former President was, therefore, of the view that the winning quotations were “rather too high” and hence recommended the construction of modest stadia he had come across while on a visit to Shanghai in China.
According to the memo, President Kufuor’s sentiments had earlier been communicated in a letter signed by Dr Kofi Amoah, then Chairman of the Local Organising Committee (LOC) of CAN 2008, and dated July 20,2005.
In the said letter, Dr Amoah had informed Mr Osafo-Maafo that the Shanghai Construction Group had pleaded to be chosen to build a 15,000- capacity stadiujn within 21 months for $18 million.
In a related development, a letter containing Mr Osafo-Marfo’s challenge of the inclusion of the Shanghai Group’s bid is currently being sought for at the Ministries of Youth and Sports and Education.
After bid process
The Cabinet memo further pointed out that the Shanghai Group had not submitted any bid by February 7,2005 to be considered by the evaluation committee and that the company had expected the government to provide direct funding for the construction, although other firms had been rejected for not providing funding.
Led by his lawyer, Mr Sarfo Buabeng, to give his evidence-in- chief in the case in which he has been accused of defrauding by false pretence and causing financial loss to the state, Woyome said Mr Osafo-Maafo and Dr Amoah were sent to China to negotiate with the Shanghai Group.
According to the accused person, the MoU quoted $38 million as the cost of the construction of one stadium, instead of Shanghai’s earlier $18 million quotation.
Petition to Attorney-General
In an agitated tone, which was occasionally calmed by either his lawyer or the trial judge, Woyome stated that he was contracted by the government to do financial engineering to raise funds for the stadia construction project.
According to him, two per cent of the fund raised was to be paid to him and so after the government had abrogated the contract for the stadia construction project, he got in touch with a lawyer from London to represent his interest.
The accused person told the packed courtroom that his lawyer tried an amicable settlement of the matter with former President Kufuor’s government but all to no avail.
Following from that, the accused person said he consequently petitioned the then Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs Betty Mould-Iddrisu, who called for a meeting of all stakeholders.
He said at the said meeting, Waterville Holdings explained financial engineering initiated Woyome was separate from two contracts the government had with Waterville Holdings for stadia construction.
Woyome was said to have raised 1.1 billion euro facility from Banc Austria, and as part of the conditions for the release of the funds for stadia construction and other projects, the government was to accept facility by September 30,2005 or risk losing it.
The government did not accept said facility.
Settlement
The accused person told the court that he consolidated his claim began a process with the Attorney-General’s Department towards settlement.
He said it was eventually agreed that he should be paid two per the total arranged funding for which would have comprised i regional hospitals, one nation; accident and emergency hospital an 800-bed capacity, 10 region; and more than 60 plant and ti; culture facilities for the Ghana Atomic Energy Commission (GAEC).
Ghana Mission in China
A letter from the Ghana Mission in China, signed by the then First Secretary, Mr Maxwell Nyarko-Lartey and dated August 11, 2005, which (furnished the LOC with particulars the Shanghai Group’s bid, was tendered in evidence after the court had overruled the prosecution’s objection to the tendering of the document.
Asked where he got the letter from, Woyome replied that it was a "public document” which, in effect, could be accessed by anyone.
Hearing continues on June 18, 2014.
Source: Daily Graphic