Mawuse Oliver Barker-Vormawor, a Ghanaian and Cambridge-Africa Ph.D. student at the Faculty of Law, has called out President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo for acting in morally questionable ways and applauded Speaker Alban Kingsford Sumana Bagbin for effectively calling the bluff of the executive arm of government by his logical reaction to the unsustainable precedent the President was attempting to establish.
Oliver’s outburst stemmed from the recent controversy brewing over the president’s approach of engaging in petty maneuvers, revealing an embarrassing habit of absence of principle.
According to the governance advisor with significant law and policy expertise in various African countries, in the United States, and within the United Nations System, the president’s unchecked actions could derail government businesses and harm the future of Ghana’s growth.
Osagyefo Oliver Barker-Vormawor said the following on his Facebook page:
“Let’s discuss the brewing constitutional crisis arising from the confrontation between the Speaker of Parliament and the Executive Branch.
I want to make my position clear from the outset: I have consistently argued that the bill championed by Sam Dzata George is fundamentally flawed and poses a significant risk to our collective human rights. I believe its ramifications are not fully understood, even by its proponents.
With that being said, our opposition to government actions should mirror our values and demonstrate unwavering sincerity.
Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo is within his rights to veto any bill he disagrees with, as he does in this case. True leadership entails standing by your decisions with clarity and conviction.
Unfortunately, the President has shown a lack of adherence to principles and moral courage when it’s most needed. Opposing the bill should be a matter of principle, articulated boldly and with transparency.
However, his inclination to skirt around the issue through dubious technicalities only serves to endanger Ghana’s rule of law more than protect it.
The President’s role, as defined by our Constitution, is straightforward: to veto legislation he opposes, following the proper constitutional procedures. Instead, Nana Addo’s approach of engaging in petty maneuvers reveals a disconcerting absence of principle.
Initially, the Presidency employed a proxy to lodge a groundless lawsuit in the Supreme Court, attempting thereafter to assert that this legal action precludes Parliament from fulfilling its constitutional duty to present the bill for his consideration.
This stands in stark contrast to the E-Levy bill situation, where the Presidency proceeded to enact the legislation despite a pending legal challenge, exposing a glaring inconsistency in their principles.
This approach sets a perilous precedent that could severely disrupt governmental functions. We are now faced with a scenario where any opposition to any bill, including the anticipated Affirmative Action Bill, could lead to immediate Supreme Court challenges, ostensibly halting the legislative process.
Speaker Bagbin’s stance is a logical reaction to the unsustainable precedent the President is attempting to establish.
You see, a lot of times when this Government has acted in such morally questionable ways, they have always counted on everybody else, to act properly, and so get away with the fanfooling.
This time, however, Speaker Bagbin has effectively called their bluff, delivering a significant blow to the Presidency’s credibility. The fallout from this standoff could broaden if Parliament opts to retaliate.
As the President and his Finance Minister prepare to introduce a mid-year appropriations bill, I am ready to challenge any attempts to impose new taxes on citizens under this contentious new paradigm.
Let us see who will be none the wiser.
Shalom!”
