The Appointment Committee of Ghana’s Parliament will hold public hearing tomorrow Tuesday, August 13, 2024, to consider the President’s nominees for the position of Supreme Court judge.
The two nominees are Justice Sophia Rosetta Oduokuwa Bernasko Essah and Professor Richard Frimpong Oppong.
Ghanamps.com
As announced by the Speaker of Ghana’s Parliament Rt. Hon Alban Kingsford Sumana Bagbin in a statement to clarify adjournment of the House sine die for the chamber to be retrofitted in preparation for the 9th parliament, a visit to the Parliamentary chamber by Ghanamps.com on Friday, August 9, 2024, witnessed movement in the chamber which signifies that work has indeed started.
At the beginning of the year, the Leadership of the House and the Parliamentary Service Board had decided that the chamber be retrofitted in preparation for the 9th Parliament, this was made know by the Speaker of the House.
“The urgency of addressing structural defects and replacing the audio and video equipment cannot be overstated as many have witnessed the failure of the equipment and some parts of the structure of the chamber in recent times which has in some instances led to the abrupt suspension of sittings or adjournment”, the Speaker stated when announcing the need for the refurbishment.
Kwaku Sakyi-Danso/Ghanamps.com
Rt. Hon. Speaker Alban Bagbin has assured the general public that he remains committed to his oath to inter alia “faithfully and consciously discharge my duties as Speaker of Parliament”.
The Speaker’s assurance followed his disappointment with what is playing out in the public domain after he adjourned the House sine die on July 30, 2024.
The Rt. Hon. Speaker has already recalled Parliament to sit on September 3, 2024, following a petition by the Majority side of the House; a request that outlined several matters alleged to be emergencies and needed urgent considerations.
Clarifying some of the allegations leveled against him by the Majority particularly the one that accused him of prioritising international travel over parliamentary business and of unilaterally deciding to adjourn the House on 30th July 2024, the speaker described the allegation as unfounded and made in bad faith.
According to him, the decision to adjourn the House Sine die on 30th July 2024 was not made in isolation. “This date was informed by the Parliamentary Calendar of the Fourth Session of the Eighth Parliament which calls on Parliament to adjourn at the end of the month of July.
“In my capacity as the Speaker of Parliament, it is part of my duties to uphold the principles of transparency, accountability, and due process. It is also my duty to uphold the dignity and integrity of Parliament, MPs, Officers and Staff of the Parliamentary Service. I have throughout my tenure as Speaker, not only sworn but committed to doing exactly that with all my heart and with all my might”, he emphasised.
Read below the full statement:
Before I proceed to address the specifics of the request, I find it necessary to clarify certain issues related to the adjournment particularly as these have been raised by the Majority Leader, Hon Afenyo-Markin, at a Press Conference after the adjournment sine die.
DECISION TO ADJOURN THE HOUSE SINE DIE
4. In my capacity as the Speaker of Parliament, it is part of my duties to uphold the principles of transparency, accountability, and due process. It is also my duty to uphold the dignity and integrity of Parliament, MPs, Officers and Staff of the Parliamentary Service. I have throughout my tenure as Speaker, not only sworn but committed to doing exactly that with all my heart and with all my might.
5. I am therefore duty bound to clarify the circumstances surrounding the adjournment of the House on 30th July 2024 and to correct any erroneous impressions that may have arisen as a result of the adjournment and the reactions thereafter. It is vital that the facts are understood clearly, and that the dignity and integrity of this institution remains unblemished.
6. Firstly, I have been accused of prioritising international travel over parliamentary business and of unilaterally deciding to adjourn the House on 30th July 2024. These accusations are unfounded and are made in bad faith.
7. The decision to adjourn the House Sine die on 30th July 2024 was not made in isolation. This date was informed by the Parliamentary Calendar of the Fourth Session of the Eighth Parliament which calls on Parliament to adjourn at the end of the month of July. This guide was discussed on several occasions at pre-sitting meetings of the Speaker, and Leaders and agreed to, weeks before the 30th of July 2024. As the official reports, voice, and video recordings of proceedings of the House will clearly demonstrate, I consistently communicated to the House the agreed adjournment date throughout the meeting. The adjournment was neither sudden nor unilateral in this regard as evidenced by the contents of the official reports of 6th, 11th, 25th, and 26th July 2024.
8. It is for this purpose that the House prioritised some agenda items and I committed to sit late hours till midnight to ensure that all the prioritised businesses are completed before the House adjourned sine die on the agreed 30th July 2024. This was particularly so, because in the last week to the adjournment, both Deputy Speakers had to be unavoidably absent from the jurisdiction and I had to sit throughout the sittings, as captured by the official reports.
9. Admittedly, in the last three days, to the date of the adjournment, the Hon. Majority Leader proposed an extension of the meeting to the 2nd of August 2024. The Minority Leaders opposed the proposal. The Hon. Majority Leader was reminded of the commitment of Parliament to send a delegation led by the Speaker, together with the leadership, inclusive of the Majority Leader and Clerk to Parliament to attend a conference in the United States of America. This conference had been agreed to and paid for by Parliament even before the commencement of this meeting. The Speaker, Clerk to Parliament and the former Majority Leader, Hon Osei Kyei– Mensah–Bonsu, being members and Co-Chair of the International Advisory Council of the Conference had to depart earlier. The Speaker had thus committed to leave the jurisdiction on the night of the 30th July. It would mean that from the night of the 30th and the next day the 31st, the Speaker and both Deputies Speakers would have been unavoidably absent from the jurisdiction.
10. The Majority Leader later informed me the Second Deputy Speaker would have returned by the 29th of July to preside on the 30th of July if permitted by me. He also argued that a member could be elected to preside in the interregnum. I enquired to know whether he had discussed this with the Minority Leaders. His answer was in the Affirmative. Later enquiry reveals that his answer was inaccurate.
11. Further, the attention of the Majority Leader was drawn to the state and tempo of the House and the high risk of disorder, especially as, he the Majority Leader had, as leader of Ghana’s delegation to the ECOWAS Parliament, agreed to host a delocalised meeting of the ECOWAS Parliament at Winneba, without the knowledge of the Speaker or the Clerk to Parliament, from the 29th July to the 2nd of August 2024. The Majority Leader was thus visibly absent on the floor of the House, most of the 29th and 30th July 2024.
12. The Second Deputy Speaker never arrived as submitted by the Majority Leader until the 31st of July after the House had adjourned sine die. While a member elected could have presided in the absence of the Speaker and Deputy Speakers, it is essential to understand that the presiding member could not have effectively handled administrative matters during this period nor presided over the House to take any substantive decision.
13. Again, at the beginning of the year, the Leadership of the House and the Parliamentary Service Board had decided that the chamber be retrofitted in preparation for the 9th Parliament. The urgency of addressing structural defects and replacing the audio and video equipment cannot be overstated as many have witnessed the failure of the equipment and some parts of the structure of the chamber in recent times which has in some instances led to the abrupt suspension of sittings or adjournment.
14. If Parliament does not undertake this work now, it will face significant challenges in finishing the necessary preparations before the transition to the 9th Parliament. The Chamber of Parliament is being retrofitted, upgraded, and is unavailable for use by Parliament now.
15. It is important to note that the request for the recall is based on Article 112 (3) and not 113. It is not a recall on the basis of an emergency. The reasons stated in the request are misconceived and are meant to throw dust into the eyes of the unsuspecting public.
16. Consequently, most of the issues outlined in the request, including the motion on the $250 million Financing Agreement, are businesses before the House prior to the recess. For instance, the motion on the loan of $250 million was tabled, debated and rejected by the House prior to the adjournment of the House sine die.
17. At all material times, therefore, matters which have been prioritised and agreed to, including the Affirmative Action (Gender Equality) Bill were handled and passed before the adjournment sine die. Consequently, I categorically reject the erroneous impression created by the Hon. Majority Leader that my actions were unilateral or that I placed personal travel above my duties to the House and nation. The decisions taken were in the best interest of the nation, the institution of Parliament and were made with the full involvement of the leadership of Parliament.
REQUEST FOR RECALL OF THE HOUSE
18. The request before me was brought pursuant to Article 112 (3) of the Constitution and Order 53 of the Standing Orders of Parliament, and not Article 113, which deals with emergency matters. To reiterate, Article 112 (3) of the 1992 Constitution provides that:
“Notwithstanding any other provision in this article, fifteen percent of members of Parliament may request a meeting of Parliament and the Speaker shall, within seven days after the receipt of the request, summon Parliament.”
19. Similarly, Order 53 of the Standing Orders of Parliament reinforces this constitutional provision by stating that:
“Despite any other provision, fifteen per cent of Members of Parliament may request a meeting of Parliament and the Speaker shall, within seven days after the receipt of the request, summon Parliament. Parliament shall convene within seven days after the issuance of the notice of summon.”
20. While these provisions are clear and unambiguous, it is essential to consider the broader context in which they were intended to operate. Article 112 is designed to be invoked in normal times when Parliament is on recess and a need arises in the national interest for Parliament to address. The phrase “and the Speaker shall, within seven days after the receipt of the request, summon Parliament “ is meant to prescribe the upper limit within which the discretion of the Speaker, in taking the decision to summon Parliament can be exercised.
21. It should never be lost to Ghanaians that Members of Parliament serve a dual role. They are first and foremost representatives and leaders of their constituencies, charged with the responsibility of engaging with, accounting to, listening to, and addressing the needs of their constituents.
22. It is crucial that MPs are given time to fulfil their constituency duties, which are fundamental to the democratic process. If MPs are continually summoned back to Parliament for Meetings that could be scheduled within the regular parliamentary calendar, this balance would be disrupted, the relevance of MPs lost, and their service to the constituents ineffective and of no value.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE RECALL PROVISIONS
23. A literal understanding of Article 112 (3) and Order 53, without consideration for the context and purpose behind these provisions, could lead to an absurd situation where Parliament is kept in perpetual meetings. Such a scenario would undermine the very essence of parliamentary democracy, i.e. to serve the people.
24. Moreover, this literal understanding could be weaponised by factions within Parliament to serve partisan interests, rather than the national interest. By constantly invoking these provisions for partisan considerations, Parliament could be drawn into a state of perpetual sitting, at unnecessary cost to the nation and effectively preventing MPs from attending to their constituencies and other vital responsibilities, especially in an election year when advocacy of MPs is crucial.
25. The framers of the 1992 Constitution did not intend for these provisions to be used indiscriminately or in a partisan manner. Extending their application to ordinary or routine situations, as is the case with the current request, would dilute the significance of Article 112 (3) and Order 53.
26. A careful review of the matters outlined in the request reveals that they do not meet the threshold set by Article 112. Most of the issues, including the $250 million IDA financing agreement, were already tabled before the House prior to the adjournment on 30th July 2024. The fact that these matters were already under consideration by Parliament and, in the case of the IDA Financing Agreement, were even subjected to debate and rejected, undermines the essence of the request for a recall.
27. Indeed, several of the bills listed on the request are bills that are still under consideration at Committee. The official reports of 30th July show the unwillingness of even members of the Majority side to transact the same business.
28. The above notwithstanding, given the constitutional requirement, the Speaker is obliged to summon Parliament within seven days of receiving the request, which means by the end of 7th August 2024 given that the request was received by the office of the Speaker on the 31st of July.
29. Article 112 (1) of the Constitution empowers the Speaker to appoint the place for Parliament to conduct its business. Relying on this constitutional provision and noting the unavailability of the Chamber of the House as stated above, the poor state of the Accra International Conference Centre, the Speaker has a practical challenge to appoint a place suitable for a parliamentary meeting.
30. It is worth noting, however, that while the Constitution provides that “the Speaker shall, within seven days after the receipt of the request, summon Parliament.”, it is the Standing Orders which provides that “Parliament shall convene within seven days after the issuance of the notice of summon.”
The same Standing Orders empower the Speaker to interpret the Standing Orders in consonance with the Constitution. In this instance, the Constitution doesn’t prescribe the date for the meeting of the House after the issuance of the notice of summon.
31. It is my considered view that in interpreting the Orders, the Speaker must consider the context and practical realities of the situation. This approach aligns with the modern approach for interpreting statutes, which emphasises understanding the purpose and practical implications of the law.
32. The Speaker should not only focus on the literal text but also consider, the intent behind the Orders, the practical impact of different interpretations and the need to ensure efficient and effective parliamentary procedures.
33. Due to the ongoing renovation works in the chamber, and the period required to recondition the AICC, adhering strictly to the requirement of the Standing Orders that Parliament convene within seven days after the notice is issued would impose significant practical challenges. With the chamber under renovation, finding an alternative venue on short notice would be impractical, costly, and an unnecessary strain on Parliament and public funds.
34. The Speaker must weigh the broader context, such as the current logistical realities, to make an informed decision that aligns with the overarching principles of good governance and democratic integrity. This method ensures that interpretations are practically viable and reflective of contemporary needs.
35. To address these practical concerns, and to allow sufficient time for preparations, as I intimated several times to the House before the adjournment sine die, I summon Parliament to meet on Tuesday, 3rd of September 2024, at a place and venue to be communicated as soon as one becomes available. Order 53 cannot therefore be fully complied with.
Ghanamps.com
Speaker of Parliament Rt. Hon Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin has summoned parliament to an emergency meeting pursuant to article 112 (3) of the 1992 Constitution and Standing Order 53.
“I Rt. Hon Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin, Speaker of Parliament hereby summon parliament to sit on Tuesday the 3rd of September 2024 at ten o’clock in the forenoon at the place to be appointed by the Speaker in due course”
This was contained in a statement signed on Wednesday, August 7, 2024 by the Rt. Hon Speaker of the House.
Ghanamps.com
Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, James Klutse Avedzi, has directed the Ministry of Gender, Children and Social Protection to pay Caterers who provided meals for schools in the Volta Region during the 2019/20 academic year and are yet to receive payment.
This directive was issued during the Committee’s sitting in Parliament to review the Auditor-General’s Report on Government Ministries, Departments, and Agencies as of December 31, 2023.
Minister of Gender, Children and Social Protection, Dakoa Newman acknowledged the arrears, stating that it was an abnormality and that plans are underway to resolve it. She added that, the problem is not limited to the Volta Region but is a nationwide issue.
The Auditor-General’s report highlighted double payments to some Caterers in the school feeding programme, resulting in overpayments. It recommended that the Agency’s Accountant recover the wrongly paid amounts and deposit them into the Auditor-General’s Recovery Account at the Bank of Ghana.
Dakoa Newman expressed her gratitude to the Rt. Hon. Speaker of Parliament, Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin, and all members of Parliament, past and present, including former Ministers of the Gender Ministry, for the passage of the Affirmative Action Bill 2024.
The report also cited the Labour Departments in Suhum and Takoradi for unpaid compensation to workers injured on the job.
Attendees at the Public Accounts Committee meeting included Hon. Ignatius Baffour Awuah, Minister of Employment, Labour and Social Welfare, and Hon. Amidu Issahaku Chinnia, Deputy Minister for the Ministry of Sanitation and Water Resources.
Officers from various agencies, including the Livelihood Empowerment against Poverty Management Secretariat, Community Water and Sanitation Agency, School Feeding Programme, and Department of Social Welfare and Local Government Services, Head Office, Accra, were also present.
Hon. Avedzi announced that the Committee would take a one-week break and return on August 12, 2024, to examine the Auditor-General’s report on Government Boards, Corporations, and Commissions for the year ending December 31, 2023.
Ghanamps.com
The Minority National Democratic Congress (NDC) in Ghana’s parliament has called on President Akufo-Addo to immediately abrogate what it described as unconscionable, sweetheart, family affair US $34 million ambulance spare parts deal awarded to Service Ghana Auto Group Limited (SGAGL).
The caucus is convinced that the contract awarded to SGAGL, a company belonging to the daughter of President Akufo-Addo through sole sourcing was inflated.
Speaking on behalf of the minority caucus at a press conference in response to a statement issued by SGAGL in parliament, Mr Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa shredded the statement by the company which he said failed to address the fundamental issues raised by his expose’.
He noted particularly the deliberate silence of the statement on the politically exposed status of a key director of the company, Stephen Okoro who he said is “not just a close business partner of the President’s daughters, Gyankroma Akufo-Addo and Edwinna Akufo-Addo” but also has “family ties with the presidential family” as father to the president’s grandchild.
Mr Ablakwa who is the Chairman of Government’s Assurances Committee of parliament disclosed that the company is also linked to the president’s daughters through a longstanding business partnership.
“A key director of Service, Ghana Auto Group Limited, is named, Stephen Okoro. We have discovered through our parliamentary oversight, diligent parliamentary oversight, that Stephen Okoro is not just any Ghanaian or Nigerian for that matter. He is an in-law to President Akufo-Addo. Stephen Okoro has given President Akufo-Addo a grandchild.”
“This is a fact, and now in the corruption literature, politically exposed persons come under greater scrutiny. That is why when we were formulating the Office of Special Prosecutor Act, we included politically exposed persons.
The other thing that makes Stephen Okoro so politically exposed is that we have discovered that he is a longstanding business partner of the Akufo-Addo daughters.”, Mr Ablakwa revealed.
Flanked by minority members on the Health committee, Mr Ablakwa who is also Member of Parliament for North Tongu urged president Akufo-Addo to hold a presidential dinner with his family and announce a stoppage to the deal immediately.
He indicated that US $10 million out of the US $34 million has already been paid to the company by then Finance Minister, Ken Ofori-Atta for no work done with an outstanding amount of US$ 24 million which must not been denied the nation.
“Then you need to also consider the fact that between 2020 and 2023, this company, Service Ghana Auto Group Limited, has been paid 115 million Ghana cedis in addition to the $54.3 million; then the latest scandal”.
“Ken Ofori Atta on the 9th of February 2024, a few days before he left office on the 14th of February, he instructed that this $34.9 million should be approved and that his ministry would take care of $10 million and the National Health Insurance Authority should take care of the outstanding $24.9 million”.
Additionally, the Minority also demands from President Akufo-Addo to instruct the Chief of Staff, Akosua Frema Osei Opare to desist from mounting pressure on Health and Finance Ministers to make unlawful payments to SGAGL.
The NDC caucus is also urging the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) to expedite investigation and prosecution into the deal, saying “Ghana is bleeding”.
Below is the full statement by the Minority
Akufo-Addo’s Ambulance Scandal — My Response to Service Ghana Auto Group Limited’s
Statement
My attention has been drawn to a preposterous and most offensive statement from the discredited Service Ghana Auto Group Limited.
Even though none of the directors of Service Ghana Auto Group Limited could muster the courage to boldly put a name to their statement, I deem it necessary in the interest of public accountability to respond as follows:
1. I strongly condemn the use of threats by Service Ghana Auto Group Limited and their disgusting attempt to gag Ghanaians, particularly Members of Parliament and the media.
2. This ill-advised strategy to use naked threats to prevent parliamentary scrutiny, media discussions and the legitimate demand of accountability from patriotic Ghanaians who have every right to know what a colossal US$108million of our taxes are being used for under this opaque ambulance transaction is a strategy bound to fail. SGAGL is well advised to desist from issuing empty and pathetic threats as nothing will stop our democratic and patriotic resolve in the spirit of transparency, probity and media freedoms – which are all guaranteed under the
1992 Constitution, to demand full accountability in this matter. We cannot be intimidated by their bogus threats.
3. Service Ghana Auto Group Limited’s statement deliberately failed to respond to the politically exposed status of a key director, Stephen Okoro who is not only a close business partner of the President’s daughters, Gyankroma Akufo-Addo and Edwina Akufo-Addo as irrefutably demonstrated with official incorporation documents of SFO Initiatives Limited, Goodbox Limited and Good Grow Limited; SGAGL was also disingenuously silent on Stephen Okoro’s familial ties with the presidential family having fathered a grandchild of the President with the President’s daughter. Politically exposed persons always come under greater scrutiny in the fight against corruption as they can unduly influence procurement processes, abuse due process and orchestrate unconscionable payment terms in their favour, as we have seen in this transaction.
4. From the statement of Service Ghana Auto Group Limited, it purportedly participated in a competitive procurement process by the Ministry of Special Development Initiatives from 15th November, 2018 as a consortium of 7 companies. Instructively, this consortium could not have existed in 2018 and 2019 as unimpeachable records at the Registrar of Companies reveal that Service Ghana Auto Group Limited was incorporated much later, specifically on April 24, 2020.
5. Claims by SGAGL that it’s a consortium which leveraged the expertise and resources of its companies in procurement of ambulances is most laughable and ridiculous. Incorporation records show that at least 5 of the 7 companies were hurriedly incorporated between April and September 2017. None of the companies had any expertise or track record in procuring and servicing ambulances. The evidence speaks for itself: BEFT engineering was incorporated on April 20, 2017 primarily to carry out construction, renovation, civil engineering works and electrical engineering works; Elok Consult was incorporated on July 25, 2017 to carry out management consultancy, civil works, roads and building construction; Prestige Era Company Limited was incorporated on April 19, 2017 with its objects being to carry out general supply, road and building construction, oil and gas products dealer, transport and haulage. None of these companies had expertise in ambulance procurement and after-sales maintenance. This must explain why the Auditor-General exposed SGAGL for using staff of the National Ambulance Service for their maintenance contract.
6. Service Ghana Auto Group Limited peddled another blatant falsehood when it claimed that companies in its so-called consortium put in a bid at US$133,000 per ambulance.
7. Incontrovertible Payment Vouchers obtained from GIFMIS show that some of its companies were paid over US$145,000.00. Others were paid as low as US$77,034.46 and US$82,066.57 for the same specs of ambulances which confirms the reckless nature of how the cost of these ambulances was unconscionably inflated. The true and accurate payments for these ambulances per GIFMIS records are duly attached to this response.
8. The official payment vouchers obtained from GIFMIS also expose another blatant fabrication – the payments these 7 companies received were for 4X4 Mercedes Benz Sprinter 316 CDI Ambulance Vehicles and not a varied inferior 4X2 as claimed in SGAGL’s statement. Another case of financial loss to Ghana.
9. It is worth highlighting, that Ghana’s Auditor-General determined at page 24 of the Performance Audit Report on Fleet Management of the National Ambulance Service that the unit cost of the ambulance in issue is US$80,000.00
10. The discredited Service Ghana Auto Group Limited should therefore be explaining to Ghanaians what accounts for their cruel and unpatriotic inflationary pricing on the procurement of the ambulances by more than US$29million.
11. Service Ghana Auto Group Limited failed to disclose that in addition to the inflated payments on procurement of the ambulances, between 2020 and 2023 the Government of Ghana has paid them over GHS115million for servicing the ambulances, albeit under shady circumstances as firmly concluded by the Auditor-General without any challenge from the management of the National Ambulance Service.
12. SGAGL claims to have entered into an after-sales service and maintenance agreement in December 2019. On the contrary, the Ministry of Health in its public statement of July 25, 2024, states that this agreement was signed on September 10, 2020. Ghanaians are beginning to lose count of the litany of contradictions and fabrications.
13. In any case, SGAGL has only confirmed the Auditor-General’s query that SGAGL was awarded the service contract long before it was incorporated. SGAGL was incorporated on April 24, 2020 and yet it claims to have been awarded a service contract in December, 2019.
14. The claims by SGAGL that they were not contacted by the auditors cannot be credible as paragraphs 76, 82 and 83 of the Auditor-General’s Performance Audit confirms extensive field inspection and interaction with staff of SGAGL by the Auditor-General.
15. SGAGL’s purported compliance with Ghana’s procurement laws is not supported by the evidence as the Auditor-General discovers violations of PPA regulations as contained in paragraph 74 of the Performance Audit.
16. The confirmation by SGAGL that it refunded amounts as instructed by the Auditor-General can only serve as an admission of the damning findings made against SGAGL by the Auditor-General.
17. SGAGL’s attempt to justify the outrageously inflated and unconscionable US$34.9 million spare parts sweetheart deal by seeking to separate mechanical and medical spare parts is most infantile and an insult to our intelligence. With the ambulance in issue’s determined market value by the Auditor-General for a new fully-equipped ambulance being US$80,000 – how can its spare parts, be it mechanical or medical, be in excess of US$113,000?
18. The ex post facto rationalization by SGAGL to seek refuge in arrears as another justification for the unconscionable US$34.9million spare parts deal is most dubious. This is because none of Ken Ofori-Atta’s letters approving the request and his further instruction to the Controller and Accountant-General refers to arrears. Indeed the 23rd February, 2024 payment as captured by GIFMIS does not make reference to arrears. This afterthought of arrears is totally unmeritorious.
It is therefore not surprising that SGAGL was unable to state any specific amount it classifies as arrears.
19. Claims that the US$10million was not a direct payment to SGAGL is another palpable falsehood. All official communication signed by Ken Ofori-Atta including the instruction to the Controller for payment was carried out in the name of Service Ghana Auto Company Limited.
Published GIFMIS payment description also confirms this fact.
20. The lack of parliamentary approval (flagrant violation of Article 178 of the 1992 Constitution) for the US$34.9million unconscionable ambulance spare parts sweetheart deal which was duly confirmed by the Health Minister at the Assurance Committee public hearings on Thursday 1st
August, 2024, further amplifies the grave illegalities and impunity associated with this transaction. 21. I shall continue to cooperate with the Office of the Special Prosecutor and lead efforts in Parliament to scuttle this sleazy transaction in the supreme national interest.
22. We shall not rest until all the masterminds and politically exposed persons involved in this grand heist are prosecuted, and our public funds fully retrieved.
Demands:
1) President Akufo-Addo should immediately stop this US$34.9million scandalous, unconscionable, sweetheart, family affair ambulance spare parts deal.
2) President Akufo-Addo should instruct his Chief of Staff, Hon. Frema Opare, to desist from mounting pressure on the Ministers of Health and Finance to make unlawful payments to SGAGL.
3) We also urge the OSP to expedite investigations and prosecutions into this putrefying scandal.
For God and Country.
Ghana First
Kwaku Sakyi-Danso/Ghanamps.com
Member of Parliament for Bawku Central, Mahama Ayariga said he has seen a video of some supporters of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) in Natinga angrily burning NDC paraphernalia.
According to him, the anger of the youth stems from his inability to ensure that the flag-bearer of the NDC, John Dramani Mahama stopped at grandfather Gumah’s residence in Natinga as part of his campaign in the Bawku Central Constituency”.
“I appreciate the legitimate concerns of the youth and would like to apologize to them for this unfortunate incident which was occasioned by time constraints.
We had done four stops even though we were allocated two and had far exceeded the time allotted to Bawku.
We appreciate the love for the party and desire to host the flag-bearer”.
He, however, allayed the fear of the youth and assured them that Mr. John Mahama would surely visit them in due course.
“I wish to assure them that this is just the beginning of the campaign. The flag-bearer, H.E. John Dramani Mahama will surely visit Natinga in due course”
Ghanamps.com
The Member of Parliament for Bawku Central, Mahama Ayariga has revealed that the National Security Minister Takes Six Million Ghana Cedis (GHC6, 000,000.00) every month in the name of the Bawku Conflict.
According to him the National Security Minister, Kan Dapaah takes Eighteen Million Ghana Cedis (Ghc18, 000,000.00) every quarter to deal with the Bawku conflict.
He made this revelation on Waezor TV on Sunday, August 4, 2024 and described this as outrageous.
He accused the NPP government and especially the National Security Ministry of cashing in on the suffering of the people of Bawku.
The MP also insisted that after mismanaging the situation in Bawku, the NPP government has turned it to their advantage financially.
Ghanamps.com
A Delocalized Joint Meeting of the Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and Natural Resources; the Committee on Mines and Energy; and the Committee on Infrastructure of the ECOWAS Parliament has ended in Winneba, Ghana on Friday, August 3, 2024.
The five days meeting under the theme; “Plastic Waste Management: Challenges and Prospects in the Implementation of Community Activities” was aimed among other things to inform members and raise awareness on the strategies and mechanisms developed by ECOWAS for the environmentally sound management of plastic waste in the West African region.
The Joint Committees at the end of their deliberations proffer the following recommendations for consideration by plenary.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
For ECOWAS Member States
For the Authority of ECOWAS Heads of States and Government
For the ECOWAS Commission
For the ECOWAS Parliament
Some Notable Engagements by the Joint Committee
During the five days meeting, the joint committee as part of efforts to acquaint themselves with cycling of liquid and solid waste visited the Accra Compost and Recycling Plant at Adjen Kotoku in the Accra, a move that gave them insight about some best practices of sustainable waste management in Ghana.
The Accra Compost and Recycling Plant is a 600 metric tons per day capacity processing plant that takes care of most of the urban wastes, treat and process them into reusable end products like plastic pellets, recyclable products such as papers, metal scraps as well as such as organic manure.
The Committee also had the opportunity to engage and interact with stakeholders at a town hall meeting in Winneba where they shared experiences with the people and also advised the people on the need to adopt some best practices with regards to waste management particularly the culture of waste segregation.
Ghanamps.com
Rt. Hon. Peter Ala Adjetey, born on August 11, 1931, in Accra, Ghana, served as the 2nd Speaker of Parliament in Ghana’s 4th Republic from January 2001 to January 2005. A distinguished lawyer, he obtained his Bachelor of Laws (LL.B) from the University of Nottingham and was called to the Bar at Lincoln’s Inn in London. Adjetey also held a Master’s degree in Law from the University of London. Before his tenure as Speaker, he was the President of the Ghana Bar Association and a member of the Consultative Assembly that drafted Ghana’s 1992 Constitution. His leadership in Parliament was marked by a commitment to parliamentary independence, democratic governance, and the rule of law, leaving a lasting impact on Ghana’s legislative body. Adjetey passed away on July 15, 2008.
Shang Annang Papa Nii/ghanamps.com
