The embattled Minister for Finance, Ken Ofori-Atta, has challenged the authority of the Ad hoc Committee set up by Parliament to, in seven days, probe and report on the Motion of Censure against him.
According to him, one of the grounds for the vote of censure regarding conflict of interest with reference to bond issuance since 2017, and how much went to Data Bank, which is co-owned by the finance minister, is outside the remit of the committee.
Speaking through his Counsel, Mr Gabby Otchere-Darko, the finance minister argued that a member of the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC), Brogya Genfi, had taken the issue of conflict of interest with respect to bond issuance to CHRAJ, and the latter ruled in his favour.
“And if I may carry it a bit further, there is a case that I think we are all familiar with – Okudzeto Ablakwa No. 2 and Attorney General and Obetsebi Lamptey No. 2, 2012 Supreme Court Report 2 at page 845.
“And just for the purposes of this, let me just quote…To go back to the point, the Minister of Finance has gone before CHRAJ, where CHRAJ investigated an allegation of conflict of interest and ruled in his favour…
“I think that this committee should take full knowledge and cognisance of the fact that it is a constitutional matter. There is an appropriate forum and that appropriate forum is CHRAJ, not a Committee of Parliament,” he posited.
The Committee could not rule on the constitutionality of its mandate, based on the objection raised by the Counsel for the Finance Minister, but before the day’s proceedings ended, the committee assured the respondent that it will rule on the issue and write to him.
Earlier in the day, Mr Otchere-Darko requested the committee to ask the sponsors of the motion to furnish them with full documents of facts in support of the allegations contained in the motion. Citing Article 23 of the 1992, Mr Okyere-Darko said the constitution enjoins one to be fair in executing their constitutional mandate.
Article 23 states that: “Administrative bodies and administrative officials shall act fairly and reasonably and comply with the requirements imposed on them by law and persons aggrieved by the exercise of such acts and decisions shall have the right to seek redress before a court or other tribunal.”
The Counsel said that since the issue is a quasi-judicial process, his client is entitled to a fair hearing.
“In the event of matters not going well, he faces potentially the severest punishment that a Minister can get, which is removal from office,” he submitted, adding “So all we are asking for are two things; You can give us the whole list of the documents which we don’t have physically…”
It would be recalled that, the Minority in Parliament, led by their leader, Mr Haruna Iddrisu, last week moved a motion of vote of censure against Mr Ken Ofori-Atta.
The group wants the Minister dismissed over economic mismanagement and its attendant effects, such as high fuel prices, food prices, inflation and high transport prices.
Parliament consequently constituted an ad hoc Committee, co-chaired by Mr K.T Hammond, MP Adansi Asokwa and Dr Domomin Ayine, MP Bolgatanga East, to peruse the issues and submit report to the House. The two chairmen are being supported by six other members, three from the majority and minority sides of the house.
Responding to the request for document to ensure fair hearing, Mr Haruna Iddrisu said that his side didn’t have any difficulty submitting evidence and went ahead to do.
Facts in support of grounds
Yesterday, Mr Iddrisu and Mr Forson took time to explain 5 of their grounds for moving the Motion of Censure, as at the time this report was being filed.
Presenting arguments in support of the ground two, which talks about the “Unconstitutional withdrawals from the Consolidated Fund, in blatant contravention of Article 178 of the 1992 Constitution, supposedly for the construction of the National Cathedral,” Mr Iddrisu said Ghana is a very respected religious country and so building a Cathedral is not an issue.
“But when public resources are used for that purpose, it needs us to call it to question,” he said. He pointed to a warrant signed by the Minister in October 2022, regarding an expenditure of GH¢142,762,500 which was allocated for the construction of the Cathedral. He said the sponsors of the motion would want to know when parliamentary approval was given for the withdrawal of this money.
Presenting an argument in support of ground five, which talks about “fiscal recklessness leading to the crash of the Ghana Cedi, which is currently the worst performing currency in the world,” Mr Haruna noted that Ghana’s debt stock has ballooned from GH¢120b in 2017 to over GH¢450b in 2022.
He said the amount of money the country is currently spending to service this debt is GH¢37b, which is even expected to jump to GH¢45b by close of the year 2022, saying “this can only be as a result of irresponsible borrowing.”
Quoting a portion of the President’s recent address to the nation on the economy, Mr Iddrisu said President Akufo-Addo himself assented to the highest level of borrowing, as is what the country is witnessing currently.
He also noted that for over 40 years, Ghana is witnessing the highest level of inflation. He said this gargantuan rise in inflation is what has contributed to unexpected hardships that Ghanaians are experiencing and the only person responsible for it is the Finance Minister.
Talking on “Deliberate and dishonest misreporting of economic data to Parliament,” Dr Ato Forson on his part noted that since 2018, government has been misreporting economic data to Parliament with the aim of misleading Parliament and the investor community.
He said the misreporting had to do with the communication that the Finance Minister had complied with Fiscal Responsibility Act, 2018 (Act 982) when that was not the case. He noted that Section 1 of the Act, which deals with the object of the Act states that: “the act is to provide fiscal responsibility rules and to ensure macro-economic stability and debt sustainability.
Mr Forson pointed out that Ghana’s debt is unsustainable and questioned why the country can have a debt sustainability Act, yet its debts are unsustainable.
