It is a good thing the Parliament of Ghana has decided to take the initiative and assess itself carefully and honestly in the mirror.And in particular, Mr Anthony Akoto Osei must be commended for his honesty in asserting that “the last two or three years have seen the worse behaviour” among the members of parliament.
Other members of Parliament have been equally honest in decrying the conduct of some of their colleagues in Ghana’s law making body.
An MP was heard on radio talking about the fact that most members of Parliament are engaged in business without the necessary clearance. But all of this should surprise no one.
First, Members of Parliament, specifically those on the minority side, in spite of their privileged positions became law lords, gave a verdict in favour of the opposition candidate, Nana Akuffo-Addo, when there was an election petition before the Supreme Court.
They chose to stay out of Parliament and hoped that the supreme court would affirm their extra-judicial actions; for as long as they were absent from Parliament their constituents were without representatives.
And as if that was not bad enough, we have seen so many instances of poor conduct coming from members of the august house which makes one wonder whether indeed the house is what it is supposed to be.
An instance that comes to mind readily is the unanimously condemned statement from Mr Nelson Abudu Baani, the Member of Parliament for Daboya/Mikarigu who made a suggestion on the floor of the house of parliament that women who are caught in adultery should be stoned.
There was no official condemnation of the statement from the members of parliament in spite of the reprehensible nature of the statement and the fact that it was totally at odds with our professed ideals as a nation. If it were in some other jurisdiction, this Member of Parliament would not be in office today.
The question of sponsorship is another issue that has taken away the shine and prominence that Parliament enjoys as the primary law making body in this country.
It was with much discomfort to me personally when it came to light that the Public Accounts Committee, the constitutionally mandated structure for ensuring probity and accountability with respect to the public accounts of Ghana, was busy seeking sponsorship from the private companies- in this specific instance RLG, a local technology firm.
Then there is the age-old concern about absenteeism where parliamentarians who have sworn to their constituents to do the best of their abilities are nowhere to be found.
It is important that Parliament does not itself lose sight and sense of its crucial role in the constitutional scheme of things. Aside the fact that Parliament exists as the constitutionally mandated institution for the making of laws, it does not end there.
As I have noted in a previous article, the Constitution virtually requires anyone and everyone to behave, act and possess the skills and qualifications of members of parliament.
For one to become a President of the Republic of Ghana, the same principle applies- you must be qualified to be elected as a member of parliament.
There are a myriad of other positions that require that one has to first meet the qualification of members of parliament in order to become eligible to hold those specific offices.
Put in another way, it means that the framers of the Constitution had a lot of faith and trust in the institution of parliament and its members. It, therefore, stands to reason that members of parliament are to be extremely circumspect and careful in the way they conduct themselves and the affairs of parliament- after all, the Constitution requires us to look up to them in all things.
But we must all agree that Parliament has not conducted itself as best as required of an august and honourable house. Sensationalism and partisanship seems to be the order of the day.
Another instance where I had occasion to bow my head in shame was when I saw pictures in the media of a member of parliament holding a broken piece of furniture to media persons just to make a point. The question is: is Parliament not qualified to rectify an issue with respect to broken furniture internally?
In the oft-cited case of Tufuor v Attorney-General, one of the conclusions that the highest court of the land arrived at was that the Parliament was a closed book and also a master of its own rules.
I can only wish the leadership of Parliament well in the drive to restore the sinking image of the country’s legislature. After all, it is the only institution that we’ve got with the ability and presence to make a lot of difference when required.
