I think the time has come for Parliament to tame its contempt “dog” to enable the public assess their performance to help shape their operations and ensure excellent performance. The President who is the number one, go through serious public assessment so it is, with the judiciary. The old nineteenth century role of parliament must give way to modern practices, that role of just operating as an intermediary between the electorates and executive, is outmoded and must be buried. In a political system dominated by the direct relations between the leadership of the country and the voters, the major function of Parliament has altered. I have not the gut to challenge the authority and wisdom of our noblemen, but I think the decision to bring the EC bosses before them at this point should have been reconsidered.
The majority leader made a statement last week concerning the ongoing banter in the EC involving the commissioners. His position was that, power play and disagreements between the commissioner are the major causes of the tension in the EC and suggested that the focus must be on how to resolve the impasse. Whether he made that statement out of mischief, or, was an expression of his sincerest position, is another matter. But on the face value, I think that is the position our leaders must take at this point. I was therefore surprised when I heard that the EC bosses have appeared before our noblemen and was being telecast live. I don’t think that decision will help find lasting solution to the rigmarole. It could have been held in camera and report of information gathered, added to whatever will come out of the CJs work. We cannot hide or pretend not seeing the partisan posture some political actors have taken on the issue including some members of Parliament and this was clearly seen in the comments and narratives by our members after the encounter. The parliamentary encounter has only added to the discussion, how the commissioners sat at the place, and their demeanor towards each other at the place. People are more interested in that than the answers they offered to the questions which were posed to them.
I listened to some MPs on some radio stations and it was terrible. Their submissions I can say, could undermine the process going to be undertaken by the CJ and could also undermine the Madam Charlotte Osei’s right to fair trial. That is my worry and I think all such engagements must be suspended pending the CJ’s work, or be held off the public gallery (in-camera.) Parliament at this point must use its influence to help restore order in the EC than clandestinely, wading into the ongoing confusion. The woman (Charlotte) alone, is now facing the executive, the judiciary, and the legislature which is unfair. She is facing almost the same charges, and going to explain same issues to all the arms of government either directly, or through their agencies.
When it is argued that the Ghanaian parliament (majority caucus) is now under the control of the executive, nothing should or can be done to alter the situation, this denies the capacity of the majority and the public to remedy defects in their own institutions. We must begin changing some these outmoded concepts to help improve governance in the country.
WHO LEAKED THE PETITION?
That is another issue we must delve into. Governance must be seen and treated as serious business and the sanctity of the Presidency must be kept intact at all times. The lawyer, Maxwell Opoku-Agyemang has said on many radio stations that he was not the one who leaked the document and that the only outfit he submitted the document to, was the presidency. How come a document the President had not read, found itself on social media and thoroughly discussed in the media. Journalist on radio/Television, told us when the President was going to forward the petition to the CJ and lo and behold, it came to pass. Aren’t we demeaning the status of the highest office with this attitude of letting out such sensitive issues from the presidency at ease and comfort.
Source: Ohenenana Obonti Krow