Parliamentary Vetting Clash Sparks Outcry as Committee Chair Calls Incident “Needless”

A heated altercation between lawmakers during a ministerial vetting session on January 30 has drawn sharp criticism, with Chairman of Parliament’s Appointments Committee, Bernard Ahiafor, labeling the clash as “uncalled for” and a stain on legislative decorum.

The incident, which erupted ahead of scheduled vetting for nominees Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa and Kwabena Mintah Akandoh, saw members of the Minority and Majority caucuses engage in a physical confrontation, raising questions about the conduct of Ghana’s political leaders.

In a candid interview with Bernard Avle on Channel One TV, Ahiafor expressed regret over the incident, apologizing to Ghanaians while stressing that the scuffle undermined Parliament’s credibility. “Whatever happened, I apologized the following day to Ghanaians, but it was needless, it was uncalled for,” he stated. His remarks underscored growing public frustration with recurring parliamentary tensions, which often overshadow substantive governance debates.

The chairman also pushed back against critiques of late-night vetting sessions, arguing that extended hours are not unprecedented. “This is not the first time Parliament has vetted nominees deep into the night—sometimes past midnight or 1 a.m. We’ve experienced this before,” he noted, dismissing claims that the January 30 session represented a procedural anomaly. “Why create the impression that vetting beyond 8 p.m. was unusual? The fight was plainly avoidable.”

Ahiafor further rejected calls for his direct intervention during the clash, questioning the expectation for him to mediate. “Why am I expected to take part in or separate the fight? I don’t see the need for the fight in the first place,” he asserted, emphasizing that lawmakers should prioritize dialogue over confrontation.

The incident has reignited debates about parliamentary norms and the pressure-cooker environment of Ghana’s political arena. Critics argue that such clashes erode public trust in institutions, while others highlight systemic issues, including fatigue from marathon sessions and entrenched partisan rivalries.

Political analysts suggest the altercation reflects broader tensions within Ghana’s legislature, where high-stakes vetting processes often become battlegrounds for ideological and party disputes. As public scrutiny intensifies, the onus falls on leaders to restore civility and focus on constructive engagement.

Ahiafor’s apology, while a step toward accountability, leaves lingering questions about how Parliament plans to prevent future disruptions. With Ghanaians increasingly vocal about demanding transparency and maturity from elected officials, the incident serves as a stark reminder: the nation’s legislative progress hinges not only on policies but on the conduct of those entrusted to uphold democracy.