More Trouble for Ghana’s Finance Minister as Minority Moves to Censorship Him  

Barely a week after his own party members had called for the removal of the Ghana’s Minister of Finance Ken Ofori Atta, the Minority in Parliament, has also filed a notice of motion on a vote of censorship on him. This has been contained in the order papers of Parliament from the November 1, 2022 and still ongoing.  

This notice, filed by Minority Leader Haruna Iddrisu minority Chief whip, Mohammed-Mubarak and other 127 members of parliament cite seven (7) reasons for the censorship of the Finance Minister.

The motion started by stating, “That this Honourable House passes a vote of censorship on the Minister responsible for Finance Mr. Ken Ofori Atta in accordance with Article 82 of the 1992 constitution on the following grounds”.

The 7 Reasons

1. Despicable conflict of interest ensuring that he directly benefits from Ghana’s economic woes as his companies receive commissions and other unethical contractual advantage, particularly from Ghana’s debt overhang.

2. Unconstitutional withdrawal from the consolidated fund in blatant contravention of article 176 of the 1992 constitution supposedly for the construction of the President’s Cathedral

3. Illegal Payments of oil revenues into offshores accounts into offshore accounts in flagrant notation of Article 176 of the 1992 constitution.

4. Deliberate and dishonest misreporting of economic data to Parliament.

5. Fiscal peaklessness leading to crash of Ghana’s cedis which currently is the  worst performing currency  in the world.

6. Alarming incompetence and frightening ineptitude resulting in the collapse of the Ghanaian economy, and an excruciating cost of living.

7. Gross mismanagement of the Ghanaian economy, which has occasioned untold and unpredicted hardship.

Brouhaha on Motion

Meanwhile, Deputy Majority Leader, Alexander Afenyoh-Markin has questioned why this motion, when the Minister, coming to the plenary of parliament as a stranger could employ the services of a counsel. While contending that this is a serious matter that should be considered seriously by the House, he doubted whether the Minister had been served with a copy of the advertised motion. He also contended that all members be served with copies of the motion. According to him, this could happen to any other Member of Parliament. He intimated that he was not against the motion but was only cautioning that they do nothings for political expedience.

On his part, Hon. Harruna Iddirsu stressed that he will move the motion at all cost, once it had been admitted by the speaker. While describing it as meritorious, he argued that the House was governed by the 1992 constitution and the Standing Orders of Parliament. Therefore, if the Deputy Minority Leader was in disagreement with it, he knows what best to do”.

He maintained that though his side might not have the numbers to do the censorship, he believed that those NPP members who went Public to call for the removal of the finance would back to the Minority in this regard,  he contended that the Minister had become a small god to the president, so that he should not be touched.

Touching on what he termed “Nana’s speech on Sika mpeh dede” he debunked his (Nana’s) claim and intimated that there will surely be a haircut of a sort by a barber of a sort.

By S.O. Ankamah