A private member’s motion filed by the Member of Parliament (MP) for Atwima Mponua, Mr Isaac Asiamah, calling for the establishment of a bipartisan Parliamentary Committee to investigate the country’s abysmal performance at the 2014 World Cup was defeated in the House yesterday.
The debate on the issue was marked by sharp disagreements that hinged on partisan political considerations, and after about two hours of back-and-forth arguments, all members of the Majority voted against the motion, while all members of the Minority voted in favour of it.
When a head count was conducted, 94 were against the motion, while 76 were in favour of it.
Prior to the debate and the vote, the Speaker, Mr Edward Doe Adjaho, had demonstrated firmness and non-partisanship by shooting down an attempt by the MP for Bawku Central and Minister of Youth and Sports, Mr Mahama Ayariga, to raise a preliminary objection to the moving of the motion.
Ayariga’s argument
Mr Ayariga said, indeed, the issue was of public importance but if Parliament wanted to ascertain the facts, it had no business establishing a committee.
In his view, what Parliament could do was to, through a motion, call on the President to establish a commission of enquiry to investigate the matter.
He also drew the attention of the House to the existence of a Constitutional Instrument (CI 82) which had been promulgated to give legal effect to the establishment of a committee by the President to investigate the matter.
Mr Asiamah’s motion calling on the House to investigate the matter was, according to Mr Ayariga, tantamount to asking for the establishment of a parallel investigative body.
The minister, frequently, referred to Article 278, which he said stated what powers Parliament had in relation to the establishment of commissions of enquiry.
The establishment of a committee by the President, in his opinion, had made any such move on the part of Parliament moot.
While Mr Ayariga went on with his views, Mr Adjaho kept giving hints of the direction in which he (Adjaho) would go on the matter.
“Honourable member, what are you trying to say? ” he asked repeatedly.
“Are you trying to say Parliament has no power to set up a committee to investigate the matter? I don’t get the gravamen of your argument,” he said.
However, Mr Ayariga only sought to repeat his earlier arguments.
Opposing views
The MP for Sekondi, Papa Owusu-Ankomah, said the position articulated by Mr Ayariga was totally misconceived and could not be considered a preliminary objection.
Mr Ayariga’s position, he said, could only be a point argument.
He said the Constitution had established the three arms of government and sought to ensure that no one arm undermined the others.
But the sequence of events, he said, pointed clearly to the fact that the President, Mr John Dramani Mahama, was seeking to undermine the House.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah said state resources were used to support the Black Stars and Parliament had every right to investigate the matter.
That right or power, he added, was stated explicitly in the 1992 Constitution, adding that the Constitution even gave committees established by Parliament the powers of a High Court.
“And while Parliament is not bound to ask the President to establish a committee, is the President trying to stifle debate in this House?” he asked.
“I am disappointed in the President,” he said.
The MP for Abuakwa South, Mr Atta Akyea, who appeared angered by Mr Ayariga’s moves, said the arguments put forth by Mr Ayariga suggested that he was calling on Parliament to subordinate its powers to the Executive and said the minister’s posture and arguments were an embarrassment to Parliament.
By his arguments and the views expressed by like-minded members, Mr Akyea said Mr Ayariga did not even understand the separation between the Executive and the Legislature, adding that Mr Ayariga’s arguments suggested that “the Constitution should be torn into shreds”.
“This is the height of ignorance,” he said.
He was made to withdraw that statement.
“If we allow this, it means that anytime the President wants to hijack our work, he will come up with a CI and tie our hands behind our backs. Parliamentary power is not at the pleasure of the President. Then we must vacate this House. What is our essence if any time we want to work the President can hijack our work?” he asked.
“We have an undeniable power. It is essential that we hallow the name of this House. Is there any matter that should not have parliamentary scrutiny?” Mr Akyea asked again.
Speaker’s ruling
Mr Adjaho ruled that the motion should be moved and invited Mr Asiamah to do so.
The Speaker said he had not been clothed with the powers to interpret the constitution and, therefore, found himself restrained and incapable of making any comment in that regard.
In obvious reference to Mr Ayariga’s arguments, he said any one who wanted to interpret articles 278 and 103 of the Constitution needed to go to the Supreme Court.
In his opinion, he said, to sustain the objection raised by Mr Ayariga would be to act in bad faith.
He said leadership had been trying to build concensus on the issue for some time now and the motion had been scheduled to be moved last Friday.
It was, therefore, surprising, he said, for a CI to emerge yesterday in an attempt to stifle the moving of the motion.
“If the motion had been carried on Friday, would we have CI 82?” he asked.
Mr Adjaho said the CI, which was brought to his attention yesterday, was in bad faith” and added that such move should never be encouraged in Parliament.
“This is a House of debate. Whether the House decides to set up a committee or not is for the House to decide. It is not for the Speaker. I have admitted the motion.
“This is a matter that Ghanaians are interested in. If the House decides to go into it, let them go ahead and decide so. If they think they will not go into it, it is for the House to decide.
“We should be careful about the governance of this country and whatever we do should capture the mood of this country. I thought for once this House would like to speak with one voice on this matter,” he said, among many other things.
Asiamah moves motion
Mr Asiamah, in moving the motion, said the investigations should, among other things, ascertain why Ghana failed in Brazil and whether the failure was as a result of greed on the part of government officials, dishonesty, lack of transparency and accountability or lack of respect for authority.
However, in his submissions, he kept making value judgements, indicting the officials who accompanied the team and suggesting that they were corrupt.
The Speaker warned him to abandon that line of argument.
Mr Adjaho wondered how he (Asiamah) could call for a probe and yet, even before the committee was set up, accuse officials of malfeasance.
More views
Alhaji Mohammed Muntaka Mubarak, the Majority Chief Whip, urged the House to reject the motion.
He argued that the Minority, even before filing the motion, had made serious allegations against officials involved in the management of the team and officials of the Ministry of Youth and Sports.
It was hypocritical, in his view, for the Minority to turn round, come to the House and demand an investigation.
The MP for Bekwai, Mr Joe Osei-Owusu, said Parliament was the institution best suited for the investigations.
He said if the Executive arm of government formed a committee to investigate a ministry, it was tantamount to a body investigating itself.
He reminded the House of precedents and said the President could issue a White Paper rejecting the findings of the commission which had been established.
Other contributors were Dr Benjamin Bewa-Nyog Kunbuor, the Majority Leader, and Mr Alfred Agbesi, the Deputy Majority Leader.
