Moses Oliver Barker Vormawor, Ghanaian, Cambridge Africa Doctor. Law student Alban Addo, who accused President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo of ethically questionable behavior, effectively calling out the executive branch of government’s bluff with its logical reaction to an unsustainable precedent. He praised House Speaker Kingsford Sumana Bagbin. The president was trying to establish.
Mr. Oliver’s rant comes in the wake of a recent controversy over the president’s involvement in petty schemes and reveals an embarrassing habit of disregarding principles.
Governance advisers with significant legal and policy expertise in various African countries, the United States and within the United Nations system say the president’s unchecked actions could derail government business and negatively impact Ghana’s growth future. It is said that there is.
Mr Oliver Barker Vormavor from Osagyefo said on his Facebook page:
“Let’s discuss the constitutional crisis arising from the conflict between the Speaker of the National Assembly and the executive branch.
I would like to make my position clear from the beginning. I have consistently argued that the bill supported by Sam Zata George is fundamentally flawed and poses grave risks to our collective human rights. I don’t think its implications are fully understood, even by its proponents.
That said, our opposition to government actions must reflect our values and demonstrate unwavering integrity.
Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo has the right to veto any bill he disagrees with, as in this case. True leadership requires defending your decisions with clarity and conviction.
Unfortunately, the president has shown a failure to uphold principles and moral courage when we need it most. In principle, opposition to this bill should be expressed boldly and transparently.
But his tendency to sidestep the issue through questionable technicalities only endangers, rather than protects, the rule of law in Ghana.
The role of the president as defined by the Constitution is straightforward. Following proper constitutional procedure, the president can veto bills he opposes. Rather, Nana Addo’s approach to engaging in petty maneuvering reveals a disconcerting lack of principle.
Initially, the president hired an attorney to file a frivolous lawsuit with the Supreme Court, and then tried to argue that the lawsuit would prevent Congress from fulfilling its constitutional duty to introduce legislation.
This is in stark contrast to the situation with the E-Levy bill, where the president proceeded with enactment of the bill despite pending legal challenges, exposing clear contradictions of principle.
This approach sets a dangerous precedent that could significantly disrupt government functions. We now face a scenario in which opposition to any bill, including the anticipated affirmative action bill, could result in an immediate Supreme Court challenge, ostensibly halting the legislative process. .
Chairman Bagbin’s position is a logical response to the unsustainable precedent the president is establishing.
You know, when this government has taken morally questionable action, they’ve often always expected others to behave appropriately, so they’ve ignored the provocation.
But this time, Chairman Bagbin effectively called their bluff, dealing a serious blow to the president’s credibility. The fallout from this standoff could be even greater if Congress chooses to retaliate.
As the President and Treasury prepare to introduce a mid-year spending bill, I stand ready to challenge any attempt to impose new taxes on our people under this contentious new paradigm.
Let’s see who is not so smart.
Shalom! ”
to follow news ghana upon Google news