Parliament not springboard for joining Executive

By Ebenezer Hanson

The debate over whether the fusion of Parliament and the Executive, the peculiar system of government being practiced in Ghana, has served the ends of democracy by meeting the needs, aspirations and concerns of the people, is becoming an interminable one.

The seeming, unending discourse over this all-important subject and the quality of views it has attracted in recent memory are an indication that either people think the arrangement is unsatisfactory or there is some iota of uneasiness on the part of commentators about this novelty of a system. The issue resurrected during the 2007 the vetting of nominees for ministerial appointments.

Additionally, about two months, Dr. Papa Kwesi Nduom, the flagbearer of the Convention People’s Party, (CPP) has added his voice to the discussion by declaring publicly that in the event that he becomes President, he will sponsor legislation to remove the provision in the Constitution that allows Ministers of State to be part of the Executive.

He reasons, “Parliament must be seen as an important end in itself and not a stepping stone to joining the Executive,” and reveals that he “ will also ensure that Parliamentarians get the necessary office facilities, research administrative support and other resources to enable the legislature to play its important checks and balance role vis-à-vis the Presidency”.

The appointment of Ministers from Parliament is a Constitutional requirement provided for under Article 78(1) which states, “Ministers of State shall be appointed by the President with the prior approval of Parliament from among members of Parliament or persons qualified to be elected as members of Parliament, except that the majority of Ministers of State shall be appointed from among members of Parliament.”

A Ghanaian renowned Professor of Political Science, Yaw Saffu, agrees with Dr. Nduom when commenting on the relations between Parliament and the Executive in the Ghana Integrity Report 2004 observes that the 1992 Republican Constitution provides for a mixed system of executive, rather than a wholly presidential system. The majority of the president's cabinet is required to be selected from Parliament. Indeed, with the tight party discipline that characterizes behavior and activities of Members of Parliament, the system often looks more parliamentary than presidential, until one examines the powers of the presidency, which are quite clearly beyond those of any prime minister….”

Prof. Saffu reinforced the point at a the CDD-FNF 4th Annual Liberal saying that the structure has resulted in a “hobbled Parliament” which cannot exercise effective oversight responsibility over the executive. He adds that this novel structure together with the Transitional Provisions constitutes some the “leaven” of the 1992 Fourth Republican Constitution that is begging for amendment.

“MPs are expected to exercise oversight responsibility over the executive. The Constitution also provides that majority of Cabinet Members must be appointed from Parliament. But because of the intense of desire to be appointed a Minister, many MPs tend to be less critical of the policies of the executive in order to be considered by the President for Ministerial position. We now have a Parliament which is bereft of its powers, indeed it is a hobbled Parliament,” he expatiated in an interview with Public Agenda.

In another interview with Public Agenda, Hon. John Tia and Idrrisu Haruna, Minority Chief Whip and Minority Spokesperson on Communications respectively, shared the concerns of Prof. Saffu blaming the Constitution for the flaw. “It is the weakness of the Constitution and until Article 78 is amended we cannot make progress,” submitted Hon. Tia.

Besides, Hon Tia pointed out it is near impossible for an MP to initiate a Private Member’s Bill because any bill which has financial implications on the Consolidated Fund is barred by the Constitution except it emanates from the executive.

He made a clear distinction between the British Parliament and Ghana’s Parliament that although both have Ministers of State, in Britain, unlike Ghana, “it is Parliament that controls the purse; and it controls the purse and it can also institute investigations into anything”. He added that, “In America, like Britain, it is Congress that controls the purse.”

The MP for Asikuma/ Odoben/Brakwa, Hon. Paul Collins Appiah-Ofori, also agrees with Prof Saffu. According to him, many MPs aspiring to be ministers will keep mute over “bad” things and this affects the national interest adversely.

“The path beater does not know whether the path is straight or crooked, it takes an onlooker to point that out. If he listens and corrects it, he takes the credit and not the onlooker. So whoever is in a position of responsibility and considers those who point out mistakes to him or her, as an enemy does not want to succeed,” he waxes philosophically.

He submits that the 1992 Constitution recognizes that “human beings are not God” and therefore vested Parliament with the power to oversee the executive. “Thus if MPs do not want not give effect to the constitutional provision by pointing out the shortcomings of the executive, then such persons are laying the foundation for the destruction of the country. And therefore I invite all MPs to place the national interest above parochial interest; Ghana first.”

An NPP MP, who spoke on condition of anonymity, also attributed the problem to the hybrid nature of the Constitution. “Ghana’s Parliament is still a child at birth; it is a fusion of the British, American and French systems of government.” He observes that Ghana’s legislature has a clearly defined function with autonomy and is suppose to have oversight responsibility over the executive through committees.

“It is regrettable that the Committee Chairmen are usually whipped to toe the line of the executive. If you will recall when there was debate over some monies for the Ghana @ 50 Celebrations only two MPs from the majority side opposed it: Hon. P.C. Appiah-Ofori and Hon. Eugene Atta Agyepong, ” he further explains.

Only days ago, Mr. Joseph Asunka, the Programmes Officer of Ghana Centre for Democratic Development (CDD-Ghana), also called for the amendment of the constitutional provision that allows the government to appoint majority of Ministers from Parliament. According to him, the provision has created a situation where on account of official assignments Ministers of State tend to absent themselves from parliamentary duties.
He contends that, the nation could only derive optimum service from Parliamentarians especially in respect of law making, if the government appoints only a fewer of them as Ministers “In that case the parliament suffers from limited human resources any time such parliamentarians join the executive and the same happens to the executive when such people assume parliamentary duties,” he noted