Saturday,
August 25, 2012
The new phrase in the lexicon of
Ghanaian politics—judgement debt—has aroused as much indignation as would make
the ordinary Ghanaian cringe at its mere mention.
What has begun happening between
the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament (PAC) and Alfred Agbesi Woyome, the
beneficiary of the 51 million Ghana Cedi judgement debt payment, has pushed that
indignation a notch higher.
It also raises several disturbing
questions bordering on legal issues and fundamental human rights. More
troubling, though, is that it has also revealed the extent to which partisan
political interests can jeopardize the work of institutions of state.
Certainly, in our contemporary
politics, no case involving public funds has attracted so much public interest (or
anger?) as this Woyome one. It is so, not necessarily because theft of public
funds is a novelty but because of the circumstances surrounding it—and the fact
that it is part of a practice that has hitherto not been highlighted in public
discourse on the management of national affairs until now.
The furore that this judgement
debt payment has provoked is indescribable. We could tell from public reaction
to it that it is a major cause of anger against the government. That is where
the politicization kicks in to suggest the existence of two blocks:
·
political
opponents of the government who castigate the authorities for encouraging impropriety,
·
supporters
of the government who consider the judgement debt as pre-existing the NDC
administration and blame the Kufuor government for it.
Certainly, the NPP arm of
political opponents of the government are vigorously campaigning with this
matter because Woyome is said to be a financier of the NDC, meaning that the
money paid him will definitely be funneled into the NDC’s coffers. Righteous
concern.
But beyond that, they are angry
just like other Ghanaians because of the shady circumstances surrounding the
payment of the judgement debt to Woyome. I am with them as such and want the
matter to be taken through due process to a logical and acceptable conclusion.
That is what the courts are doing. So, where does the PAC come in again to
complicate matters?
Thus, the judgement debt payment
problem should be seen in a wider scope for us to understand the fracas between
the PAC and Woyome.
The genesis of this fracas is
well known, but let me re-state it briefly. The PAC is looking into the
Auditor-General’s report and seeking answers from all those against whom
adverse findings have been made. Alfred Agbesi Woyome, a supposed financier of
the NDC, is one of those implicated by the report; but he has refused to appear
before the PAC on two occasions, insisting that once the case is already before
a court of competent jurisdiction, he doesn’t see any need to be “tried” again
at a different venue on the same “charges.”
Matters have now come to a head
upon his refusal for the third time to honour the PAC’s invitation. Not even a
subpoena from the PAC would break him down. This is where Albert Kan-Dapaah,
the Chair of PAC, has taken umbrage and threatened to cause his arrest.
How
does he intend to do so? Through the mechanism of the Ghana Police Service,
compelling the IGP to produce Woyome before the PAC. Is Kan-Dapaah right to go
that distance? To a limited extent, maybe. Apparently, considering the PAC as
analogous to a High Court, one may say that it can take such an action against
the recalcitrant Woyome. But there are other legal limitations, for instance,
that the PAC will have to legitimize such an action through the normal court
system to be able to conclude any action (such as committal to prison) of Mr.
Woyome.
This
is where the first part of the fracas emerges. Does Kan-Dapaah have the power
to go that way without the consent of the members of the PAC? As we can tell
from the reaction of a section of the PAC membership—mostly NDC MPs—he can’t do
anything of the sort. He can’t unilaterally order the arrest or detention of
Woyome.
As
the First Deputy Speaker, Doe Adjaho (NDC MP for Avenor) has explained, the
best the PAC Chairman can do to legitimize any action of the sort is to pass it
through the Speaker of Parliament now that it is clear that Woyome has
repudiated the PAC’s invitation and undermined its authority—which means that
he has flouted a constitutional provision.
The
controversy persists. Although Kan-Dapaah doesn’t disagree with Doe Adjaho, he
seems unhappy that some partisan political influences from the NDC members of
PAC might endanger the committee’s work. What is the basis for this
apprehension?
This
is where the second part of the fracas surfaces. The Woyome case is already
heavily politicized. After all, from the very moment that it surfaced, the case
has assumed ridiculous political dimensions to the extent that opponents of the
government have been quick to lump everything together to conclude that the
judgement debt payment made to Woyome was an intricate effort by government
officials to siphon money from the national coffers to finance the NDC.
Scathing
comments to that effect have dominated their discourse and portrayed the NDC as
an accomplice. I am not surprised, then, that some NDC followers have also begun
seeing Kan-Dapaah as a “conduit” for the NPP’s anti-NDC propaganda on this
score.
Putting
aside all these issues, we can still perceive this Woyome case as a major
challenge. Even before the details of the case emerged, some of us had already
condemned the payment of this judgement debt to him and called for stern action
to retrieve the money and for the perpetrators to be punished. We still stand
by our conviction that something fishy went on to facilitate the deal. That is
why the matter must be properly dealt with.
To be continued...
·
E-mail:
mjbokor@yahoo.com
·
Join
me on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/mjkbokor
No comments:
Post a Comment