Debates of 8 Jun 2007

MR. SECOND DEPUTY SPEAKER
PRAYERS 10:20 a.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:20 a.m.
Hon. Members, correction of Votes and Proceedings and the Official Report. P.
1. . .
Mr. John A. Ndebugre 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, page 7, item 5, there is some construction there that I want to seek your indulgence for us to look at.
“The Votes and Proceedings of the Thirteenth Sitting held on Wednesday, 6th June, 2007 and the Official Report of 31st May, 2007 were adopted as true records of Proceedings.”
Mr. Speaker, I do not think that the construction makes much absolute sense. I thought it should be “. . . adopted as a true record of the Proceedings.” But the way it is rendered here does not convey much.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:20 a.m.
Well,
hon. Member, it is a question of style. How it is rendered is not wrong but you want it to sound better, I believe.
Mr. Ndebugre 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am saying that it is wrong.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:20 a.m.
They are two different records.
Mr. Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:20 a.m.
Mr.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:20 a.m.
Did you bring the omission to attention when they were being corrected?
Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I was not in the Chamber at the time but it cannot stand as the true record because with two pages missing, it cannot really be held that what is captured is the true record. So I just want that correction to be effected.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:20 a.m.
Very well, the Clerk's Office will take notice.
Mr. J. Y. Chireh 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I still want to agree with hon. John Ndebugre, my Friend, that you separate the two to reflect what the Chief Whip is saying. Normally I remember the Speaker says that if any Member has corrections to make as far as the Official Report is concerned, they should bring it to the notice of the Table Office.
Therefore, if you lump them together it is not correct; they should be separated, that we adopted the 6th June, 2007 Votes and Proceedings separately and then this other one which normally is not to say that it is a true record. If it is a true record and I want to correct it, it would not be possible.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:20 a.m.
Well, as to the way of putting it, I think the Clerk's Office will take note of that.
Majority Leader (Mr. F. K. Owusu- Adjapong) 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I believe from
what has been said by my hon. Colleague, what we need to do is to write separate sentences for them.
In the case of the Official Report, all that we agree is that we should take note of it and anybody who has any corrections to be made should discuss it with the Clerk's Office. We should not make it a single sentence. We agree on the Votes and Proceedings and then we say that we have taken note of the Official Report subject to any further corrections that may be brought to the attention of the Clerk. I think that will be a better rendition.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:20 a.m.
Very well, Clerk, please take notice of it. As at the time the Official Report is considered, it is not actually thoroughly considered; they still need to go to the Hansard Office to correct things. At that point in time, you cannot declare it as a true record; so the Clerk's Office will take notice of that.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 10:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, my attention has been drawn to a possible problem that we should find a way of being told when the corrections have been completed. Otherwise, somebody may go to the Clerk - I am not saying the Clerk will condone it -- and end up inserting things that were not the true records. So if there should be any such records, we should be further informed. So we should find a way of settling this matter and the Clerk's Office should study and advise us on the best procedure.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:20 a.m.
Yes, I order that the Clerk should confer with the Business Committee and then see how to place it as an item.
Page 8 . . . 15. No corrections? The Votes and Proceedings of Thursday, 7th June, 2007 is ordered to stand as a true record of the House's Proceedings.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE 10:30 a.m.
Majority Leader/Chairman of the Business Committee (Mr. F. K. Owusu- Adjapong) 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Business Committee met yesterday, Thursday, 7th June 2007 and arranged Business of the House for the Fifth Week ending Friday, 15th June 2007.
Mr. Speaker, the Committee presents its report to this honourable House as follows 10:30 a.m.
Arrangement of Business
Question(s)
Mr. Speaker, the Committee has scheduled five (5) Ministers to respond to various Questions and Urgent Questions.
The details are as follows:
No. of Question(s)
i. Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing 5
ii. Minister for Communications 4
iii. Minister for Education, Science and Sports 5
iv. Minister for Harbours and Railways 5
Total No. of Questions 19
Urgent Question(s)
Mr. Speaker, one (1) Urgent Question has also been programmed for the week. The Question stands in the name of the hon. Member for Biakoye, Mr. Emmanuel Kwasi Bandua and is directed at the hon. Minister for the Volta Region.

Mr. Speaker, in all, nineteen (19) Questions and one (1) Urgent Question have been scheduled to be answered.

Statements

Mr. Speaker may allow Statements which have been admitted to be made in the House.

Bills, Papers and Reports

Mr. Speaker, Bills, Papers and Reports may be presented to the House for consideration and other businesses which have already been presented to the House would also be considered.

Motions and Resolutions

Mr. Speaker, motions may be debated and the appropriate Resolutions would be taken where required.

Conclusion

Mr. Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order 160 (2) and subject to Standing Order 53, the Committee submits to this honourable House the order in which the Business of the House shall be taken during the week.

Questions --

Minister for Water Resource, Works and Housing -- 828, 842, 843, 872 and 873.

Laying of Papers --

(a) Fourth Annual Report of the Activities of the Ghana E d u c a t i o n T r u s t F u n d (GETFund) for the period ending 31st December 2004.

(b ) Repor t o f the F inance Committee on the Development Financing Agreement between the Government of Ghana and

the International Development Association (IDA) for an amount of SDR 72.70 million (US $110.00 million equivalent) for the fifty Poverty Reduction Support Credit (PRSC-5).

Motion --

Second Reading of Bills --

Bui Authority Bill.

Committee Sittings.

Urgent Question --

Mr. Emmanuel Kwasi Bandua (Biakoye) to ask the Volta Regional Minister what caused the attack and brutalization of the settlers at Odei in the Tapa Traditional Area by a group of soldiers from the Volta Barracks, Ho on Saturday, the 17th of March 2007.

Questions --

Minister for Communications -- 901, 919, 953 and 988.

Consideration Stage of Bills --

National Accreditation Board Bill

Committee Sittings.

Questions --

Minister for Education, Science and Sports -- 815, 866, 867, 868 and 869.

Motion --

Adoption of the Report of the Finance Commi t t ee on the Development Financing Agreement between the Government of Ghana and the International Development

Association (IDA) for an amount of SDR 72.70 million (US$110.00 million equivalent) for the Fifth Poverty Reduction Support Credit

(PRSC-5).

Consideration Stage of Bills --

Bui Authority Bill, 2007

Committee Sittings.

Questions --

Minister for Harbours and Railways -- 829, 1007, 1025, 1035 and 1083.

Motion --

Third Reading of Bills --

National Accreditation Board Bill

Bui Authority Bill

Committee Sittings.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Hon. Members, that is the Business Statement for the fifth week. It is for the consideration of the House.
Mr. Sallas-Mensah 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, we filed an Urgent Motion last week to invite the Governor of the Central Bank of Ghana to brief hon. Members on the cost of the re-denomination which is just about two weeks ahead of us. Nothing has been indicated on the Business Statement as to when the Governor is coming to this House, unless they have discussed it at the Business Committee, and we do not know anything about it.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, as
the Chairman of the Business Committee, I am not aware of this motion. We really work with documents that are available to the Committee, but since he has raised it, I will check up with the Clerk's office to find out if there is in fact any such motion and if so the status of such motion. I will recommend that in future hon. Members do consult the Leadership on such matters before they raise it on the floor of the House so that we avoid any such embarrassment.
Mr. E. K. D. Adjaho 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. Majority Leader is the Chairman of the Business Committee and if his position is that Mr. Speaker has not forwarded it to him, he should say so. But the rule says that it is Mr. Speaker who admits motions and not the Leadership. So to say that in future, we should seek the consent of Leadership before a motion can be processed creates a problem. The point is that the motion has been filed and if Mr. Speaker has not forwarded it to him, he should say so and leave it there.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, let my hon. Colleague the Deputy Minority Leader and Member of Parliament for Avenor-Ave take note of what I said, that my office has not received any such motion from the Speaker's office. And my advice is that when one files such motions, one needs to discuss it with the Chief Whip to find out what in fact is the status of the motion at the Speaker's office. It is only after one has been told that the Speaker has referred it to the Majority Leader that one can come -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker, you may recall that when the Half-Hour Motion was brought to my attention, I quickly minuted it to the Deputy Clerk responsible for the Business Committee to ensure that we scheduled it for the consideration of the Business Committee and in fact we did consider it. And so what I am saying is that it may not be worth the while coming to the floor of
Mr. C. S. Hodogbey 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I filed a Question regarding the total number of Ghanaians in jail overseas and the total number of Ghanaians in jail in Ghana including foreigners and how much is being spent on a jailed person per year. That Question never came up in the agenda and I would want to know what the cause is.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:30 a.m.
You put in a Question? Very well, Chairman of the Business Committee, are you aware of that?
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, is it the normal Question or an Urgent Question? If it is the normal Question, what is the number on the agenda?
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Hon. Member, did you put it up as a normal Question or an Urgent Question?
Mr. Hodogbey 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I made it both urgent and normal -- [Uproar.] Let me explain, please. When I made it urgent the first time, it was never accepted. Therefore, I made it the second time an ordinary Question as far as the “Swapping of Prisoners Bill” -- I call it the “Swapping of Prisoners Bill” -- I do not call it Transfer of Convicted Prisoners Bill -- I asked the Question specifically because I want to know that before I will be able to comment on the Bill.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Hon.
Member, does it appear in the list of Questions that have been listed for the
information of hon. Members?
Mr. Hodogbey 10:30 a.m.
I said that in the agenda which came out about a week ago, there was nothing like that.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:30 a.m.
Very well, he says it does not appear in the list though he has filed it now as an ordinary Question.
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am sure it will go through due process and at the appropriate time the Committee would be seized with the subject matter.
Mr. Haruna Iddrisu 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I have listened to the hon. Chairman of the Business Committee. Mr. Speaker, I filed a Question at the Table Office over a week ago seeking from the hon. Minister for Finance and Economic Planning the cost involved in the re-denomination of the Ghanaian cedi.
Indeed, I was surprised that my Question was filed before the Urgent Question by the hon. Member for Mion on bird flu. But maybe because mine was on ‘re-denomination flu', the hon. Chairman of the Business Committee decided not to acknowledge it. I am aware that I filed a Question wanting to know the cost involved. I sent it to the Table Office and I signed.
I was surprised that when they were listing Urgent Questions, it was ignored. In terms of urgency, that is even more urgent. We have only a month away. The Ghanaian public needs to know how much of the taxpayers' money has been used in printing the new Ghana cedis.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:40 a.m.
Hon. Member, you have made the point. Chairman of Business Committee?
Mr. A. S K. Bagbin 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the issues raised are so critical to the work of Parliament that we cannot just ignore them and allow them to go to sleep.
Mr. Speaker, you will recall that a few
months ago there was even a publication talking about my missing motion. It was because I raised similar issues with motions that we file which do not see the light of day and we are not told where those motions are. I think that, Mr. Speaker, it calls into question our rules, our practice and procedures and we need to look at it critically.
The Clerk and his staff cannot speak on the floor of the House. So the blame is always shifted to the Clerk -- “Check from the Clerk's Table”. The Clerk can only speak through Mr. Speaker by advising him. But Mr. Speaker, I believe that the Clerk's Office, from my search, has been passing on these Questions and Motions but they do not come up for business. They are passed on to Mr. Speaker, and it is from his end that they come to the

Business Committee to be programmed for the attention of the House.

We need to look at it critically because some of these issues are so important that the people of Ghana would want to hear us, would want to know the thinking of Parliament on such issues and we cannot just be suffocating them. We should be heard on this subject. Re-denomination is so critical. People are referring to it as a flu. I do not know whether it is a flu or not. But it is something that we need to look at and make sure that it is for the benefit of the country and we approve it.

I recall that when the Governor of the Bank of Ghana was here and we threw a few questions to him and he got dazed, my hon. Colleague the Majority Leader came up and said that the Governor will be brought up the second time to meet this House. As at now, we have not seen the Governor.

So Mr. Speaker, it is important that we should throw light on these things. We should bring them up to the floor for debate so that we can clarify them. We cannot continue to operate in darkness. Parliament is not like the Executive, as the hon. Majority Leader always says. We operate in openness in the full glare of the public. We must be seen to be that transparent. The Executive operates in darkness and they deal with confidentiality and secrecy. We do not.

Mr. Speaker, I insist that the issues that

have been raised should be brought to the
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think a number of issues have been raised by my hon. Colleague the Minority Leader. It is not for nothing that we spend a lot of hard-earned money to print these things. So if you have an Urgent Question and it is not on the Order Paper, it means that it has not reached my office. Those that come after we have done the printing, and I get them, I immediately take them to the Business Committee, like I did with the Half-Hour Motion.
If my hon. Colleague is talking about a motion, the other hon. Member is also talking about an Urgent Question. I am not sure which one of them has been given to Mr. Speaker. But whatever it is, this Government is the most transparent Government known anywhere in the whole world -- [Uproar] -- A government which decided to repeal the Criminal Libel Law so that everybody can speak freely in this country -- [Interruptions.]
Mr. Speaker, if in fact there are some bottlenecks in our own administrative procedure -- [Interruptions] -- Mr. Speaker, if in fact there are some bottlenecks that we need to resolve, I have no objection to that. It is our duty to develop this Parliament so that we can all benefit from it. But I thought that my Colleague the hon. Minority Leader knows that one of the reasons we have the morning meetings with Mr. Speaker is for us to discuss these things when they come up and find out what is going wrong and correct them. I will repeat that since we resumed this Meeting, the only motion that has been referred to me is the Half-Hour Motion.
rose
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:40 a.m.
Hon. Member for Jomoro, do you have a point of order?
Mr. Ocran 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. Majority Leader is misleading the House. Urgent Questions are not put on the agenda. I am a member of the Business Committee with him and he knows it. So why is he misleading the House?
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I said those that are admitted before, we print; we put it on the Order Paper. Those that come in-between and I am informed, I bring them to the Committee of which, he is a very senior member -- Mr. Ayebi Ahwe.
rose
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:40 a.m.
Hon. Member for Ningo-Prampram, do you have a point of order?
Mr. E. T. Mensah 10:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I heard the hon. Majority Leader mentioned Mr. Ayebi Ahwe, I do not know but when you go through the list of hon. Members there is no one called Mr. Ayebi Ahwe. So who is he referring to?
Mr. Owusu-Adjapong 10:40 a.m.
Certainly I was not referring to hon. E. T. Mensah. Therefore, he should not be over-interested in ayebi ahwe rules. But then, I know that my only surviving Friend, Colleague and brother and hon. Member for Jomoro and me know each other on such matters and
that is why he has not complained. Why are you trying to be more catholic than the Pope?
Mr. Speaker, all I want us to agree is that at the end of the Sitting, we can all sit down and try to find out what is happening to such motions that are said to be with Mr. Speaker.
I want us to make progress by accepting the Business Statement for the Week and move on.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:50 a.m.
Hon. Members, it is legitimate to bring it to attention if you put up a Question and you do not see it programmed; it is legitimate. However, it is not proper to read other intentions into your Question not coming up.
The Clerk definitely is the adviser to the Speaker and when such Questions are tabled, he would discuss them with Mr. Speaker for a decision to be taken. But it is good that you bring up these issues so that they can be looked at and then Questions that are, maybe inadvertently not brought up would be brought up. Hon. Members, is there any other thing?
Mr. A. K. Agbesi 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I have heard your ruling but Mr. Speaker, last week Friday, I brought to the attention of this House, particularly the Chairman of the Business Committee, that I had filed four Questions but he informed the House that he had not seen them.
In fact, he removed his file to show to this House that there were no such Questions from me. Mr. Speaker, immediately we rose, I went to the Clerk and collected four other statement forms and filed and gave them specifically to the Clerk. One of these four Questions is the one my hon. Colleague from Tamale South
Mr. A. K. Agbesi 10:50 a.m.


has raised on the cost of the printing of the currency. Another one is on the cost so far incurred in constructing the presidential palace.

Mr. Speaker, as I see, none of my Questions have been listed though they are all Urgent Questions. Mr. Speaker, we are spending money to construct the presidential palace and how much it is, the hon. Minister came here and said he would not know until it is finished. But we cannot be constructing without knowing the cost.

Mr. Speaker, I want to know from the hon. Chairman of the Business Committee why. Now I believe strongly that my Questions have reached his office -- he has not listed them.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 10:50 a.m.
Hon. Member, I have already said that it is all right to bring it to our attention so that they would be looked at. I am sure that your Questions would be given due attention.
Hon. Members, subject to these comments, the Business Statement as read is accepted for business next week.
Hon. Members, Question time -- Hon. Minister for Energy should get ready for Question time.
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 10:50 a.m.
MINISTRY OF ENERGY 10:50 a.m.
Minister for Energy (Mr. Joseph Kofi Adda) 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, we wish to inform this honourable House that the Electricity Company of Ghana (ECG) under whose jurisdiction the distribution of electricity in the above-mentioned districts fall, does not intend to build a new substation or another bulk supply point in the Amenfi area.
It is however intended to build a 33 kV Switching Station at the Bogoso Bulk Supply Point. This will allow the separation of the three main 33 kV outgoing feeders that are at present bunched together. It will also ensure that faults on a particular feeder affect only the customers on that particular line instead of the present situation whereby a fault affects the whole area.
We note that the ECG had built a Secondary Automation System (Rural SCADA System) on the Bogoso- Asankragwa-Enchi 33 kV feeder that allows remote switching to isolate faulty portions of the line at Bogoso.
The physical installation of secondary automation equipment is completed. The outstanding work is the mounting of a communication antenna on a hill near Bogoso.
On commissioning of the secondary automation project, supply reliability will improve in the area.
Mr. Gyetuah 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, according to
the hon. Minister, the physical installation of secondary automation equipment is completed and the outstanding work is the mounting of the communication antenna.
I want to find out from the hon. Minister when the communication antenna would be mounted to make the secondary automation system functional in order to alleviate the sufferings caused by the
rampant power outages in Amenfi West, Amenfi East and Aowin Suaman Districts.
Mr. Adda 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, design works have just been completed and the scheduling is being discussed. As soon as we are firm on the date, I will inform my hon. Colleague.
Mr. Gyetuah 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, is the hon. Minister assuring this august House and the people of Amenfi West, Amenfi East and Aowin Suaman that after the construction of the secondary automation equipment, power outages in the area would be a thing of the past?
Mr. Adda 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, power outages and stability can be two different things. What we can assure him of is that when the power is on, it would be stable. We cannot always assure him of the outages because it may be more than one fault that might cause it.
Mr. Charles Hodogbey 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, my question to the hon. Minister is, what is the difference between power shedding and power outage?
Mr. Adda 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, power shedding is when we have power and we decide to ration it based on a certain programme by which some would get at a certain time and the others would get at another time. Outage simply mean when power goes off.
Mr. S. M. E. K. Ackah 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
the Aowin Suaman District is connected to the Essiama substation and at the same time it is also connected to the Bogoso one. In view of the fact that Bogoso antenna is not yet implemented, is the hon. Minister telling us that we can also put the Essiama one in operation so that this constant power outages can stop?
Mr. Adda 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, it can be considered.
Rural Areas in the Yilo Krobo
District (Electricity)
Q. 694. Mr. Raymond A. Tawiah asked the Minister for Energy when the rural areas in the Yilo Krobo District would be provided with electricity.
Mr. Adda 10:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, under the SHEP-4 programme, some selected communities in the Yilo Krobo District of the Eastern Region have been earmarked for connection to the national electricity grid. The communities in the Yilo Krobo District however do not form part of the ongoing SHEP-4, Phase-I project. The communities will therefore be connected in the subsequent phases of the SHEP-4 programme in line with the implementation schedule and the availability of funding.
Mr. Tawiah 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would want to know from the hon. Minister the names of those communities that have been earmarked.
Mr. Adda 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the names of the potential beneficiary communities include: Aboabo, Abowakor, Ahenahen, Ameganya, Apensuama 7, Aza, Huhunya, Shalom, Labolabo, Lambusi and Sogyoni.
Mr. Tawiah 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would want to know from the hon. Minister how soon these communities are going to get the electricity.
Mr. Adda 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the second set of communities would be considered when we are through with Phase-I of SHEP-4.
Mr S. A. Kwao 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, may I know from the hon. Minister why his Ministry has planned without funding.
Mr. Adda 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, we take on proposals that come from the districts, compile them and make an inventory of what we want to do in future. That is how we get the listed communities that we wish to extend electricity to.
Mr. J. K. Gidisu 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would want to find out from the hon. Minister whether the arrangements within the Ministry in terms of the SHEPs and the phases are really seriously and clinically being followed for the fact that there are some communities which are under SHEP-3 and are still awaiting connection yet he is talking about SHEP-4 Phase-I. Why not address the SHEP3 areas which are outstanding before going to SHEP- 4?
Mr. Adda 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the SHEP programme is being critically and seriously followed. The problem we had between the SHEP-3 and SHEP-4 was that we ran out of materials. But with the many credit facilities approved by this House, we have since been able to acquire the materials. We are now dealing with funds availability for constructors and consultants to move the programme on schedule.
Mr. Francis Osei-Mensah 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would want to know from the hon. Minister the number of phases that SHEP-4 has.
Mr. Adda 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, we have three phases.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11 a.m.
Question number 695 standing in the name of Mr. Alex Asum-Ahensah.
Mr. Simons Addai 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member is absent with permission and he has asked me to seek your permission to ask the Question on his behalf.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11 a.m.
Very well, go ahead.
Connection of Jaman North Constituency Towns to National Grid
Q. 695. Mr. Simons Addai (on behalf of Mr. Alex Asum-Ahensah) asked the Minister for Energy when (i) Ponkor,
(ii) Nsonsomea, (iii) Kokosua Nos. I and II, (iv) Febi and (v) Kaable, which are communities in the Jaman North constituency will be connected to the National Electricity Grid.
Mr. Adda 11 a.m.
The Ponkor, Nsonsomea, Kokosua Nos. I and II, Febi and Kaable communities form part of the SHEP-4 Programme. They however do not form part of the ongoing SHEP-4, Phase-I project. The communities would be connected in the subsequent phases of the programme in line with the implementation schedule and the availability of funding.
Mr. Addai 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would want to find out from the hon. Minister when the SHEP-4 programme would be completed to give way to the next phase to begin.
Mr. Adda 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the SHEP-4 programme would be completed next year.
Mr. John Gyetuah 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to find out from the hon. Minister what measures the Ministry is putting in place to ensure that funding is made available when implementation is due.
Mr. Adda 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the measures
the Ministry is taking to ensure that funding is made available include lobbying the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning to get budgetary allocation and also working with our development partners to get credit facilities, grants and the likes that would support our programme.
Mr. A.W. G. Abayateye 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
in line with the President's Special Initiative for Distance Learning where the children are supposed to be using television, how can these communities be linked so that the children would benefit from this distance learning programme?
Mr. Adda 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, we are currently designing the programme to
target certain schools to ensure that they have access to electricity so that they use computers and other audio/ visual equipment to enhance the distance learning programme. Once it is completed and we are sure of how to roll it out, we would announce it to this honourable House.
Mr. A. S. K. Bagbin 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to know the total cost of the SHEP-4, Phase-I project. What is the total cost of SHEP-4, Phase-1 project?
Mr. Adda 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I do not have
the information available to me now. I need time to get back to him.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11 a.m.
Minority Leader, give notice and you would get your Answer.
Mr. Bagbin 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to know how much has been invested so far in SHEP-4, Phase -1 project.
Mr. Adda 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I do not have the information readily available.
Mr. A. K. Agbesi 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to know what the estimated cost of the completion of SHEP-4, Phase-I is.
Mr. Adda 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am not so sure if I heard the question well. I do not know whether he said “shape” or “SHEP”. I want to sure about it. [Laughter.]
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11 a.m.
Hon. Member, can you clarify it for him?
Mr. Agbesi 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I believe we are not talking about “ship” in this House, we are talking about “SHEP-I” -- [Interruptions.] We are not talking about “ship” in this House. So the hon. Minister knows what we are talking about.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11 a.m.
Hon.
Minister, I hope he has clarified it for you.
Mr. Adda 11 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, on this second one I thought I heard “ship” but if it is “SHEP-4”, I do not have the information available at this stage as I speak.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Hon. Member, if you want the Answer you can give notice.
Question number 696.

Towns in Jaman North Constituency (Electricity)

Q. 696. Mr. Simons Addai (on behalf of Mr. Alex Asum-Ahensah) asked the Minister for Energy when the following towns in the Jaman North constituency would be connected to the National Electricity Grid: (i) Kabile; (ii) Jamara; (iii) Bonakire, (iv) Adadiem; and (v) Jinini.
Mr. Adda 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Kabile, Jamara, Bonakire, Adadiem and Jinini communities form part of the SHEP-4 Programme. They however do not form part of the ongoing SHEP-4. Phase-I project. The communities would be connected in the subsequent phases of the programme in line with the implementation schedule and the availability of funding.
Mr. Addai 11:10 a.m.
I want to know from the hon. Minister if he would sincerely tell this honourable House whether he thinks it is prudent to extend electricity to these areas under the present circumstances.
Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the question from my hon. Colleague clearly offends Standing Order 67 (1) (f). He asked the hon. Minister to be sincere with this House. Mr. Speaker,

Order 67 (1) (f) says that a Question shall not be asked which makes or implies a charge of a personal character or which reflects upon the character or conduct of a person or persons in their official capacity; and this clearly offends this provision.

My hon. Colleague may be advised to reframe the question. Clearly it offends the rules. [Interruptions.] That is what he did yesterday -- the hon. Member for Avenor/Ave, Mr. Doe Adjaho. Mr. Speaker, so I call on you to rule; the question is out of order.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Hon. Member, you preceded your question with “. . . if he would sincerely . . .” Hon. Member, I think your assumption might be that the hon. Minister was coming to sincerely answer questions in this House. So please frame your question well.
Mr. Addai 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to know from the hon. Minister if he thinks under the present circumstances there is the need to extend electricity to places that do not have.
Mr. Adda 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, with the availability of funding and in line with the implementation schedule, these communities would be brought on board.
Mr. Charles Hodogbey 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I think the question was not answered. The question is, with the present condition, extending electricity to the areas mentioned, is it possible? Is it very rational since, let us say, if ten people are now sharing electricity, you are now trying to add five more to them? Electricity is not going to the ten people -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Hon. Member, the one who has asked the question is satisfied with the answer. [Laughter.]
Mr. Sampson Ahi 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to know from the hon. Minister why the communities involved were not considered to enjoy the Phase I of the SHEP V Programme.
Mr. Adda 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speake r, t he communities were not involved for a number of reasons. One, their submissions did not come on time when we were considering the first project of Phase V; and two, there were also limited funds available to us, and therefore the first ones were the only ones served, anticipating that we would add the others in the subsequent projects.
Mr. Eric Opoku 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to know from the hon. Minister what is the total number of communities from the Jaman North constituency that are captured under the SHEP-5, Phase I.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:10 a.m.
This is a question outside the scope of the substantive Question.
(Maj.) (Dr.) (Alhaji) Mustapha Ahmed (retd): Mr. Speaker, I would like to know from the hon. Minister what the estimated amount of money involved in the SHEP-5 for this year is.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Hon. Member, I think you were not in the House. That question was asked and notice is required for the hon. Minister to provide the information.
Mr. Abayateye 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, in the hon. Minister's Answer he says SHEP-5, Phase I would be ending. When would the SHEP-5, Phase I end for the SHEP-5, Phase II to begin?
Mr. Adda 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, we did not indicate the specific time period for the overlapping of the two because of the
unavailability of funding. Now we are in discussions with the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning; if we are clear with the funds that we have available we would be able to put time lap to that.
Mr. J. K. Gidisu 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is quite interesting for the hon. Minister to be limiting his questions to the availability of funds. Will he tell this House, phasing out the SHEP, how much money he has made available for SHEP-5, Phase I in order to meet the targeted communities that are under the SHEP-5, Phase I.
Mr. Adda 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I said earlier on that I did not have all the information available with me and I would be able to furnish it later.
Mr. I. K. Asiamah 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to draw the attention of the House, that the hon. Member of Parliament for North Tongu, Mr. Charles Hodogbey is not only improperly dressed but the dressing is not also traditional -- [Interruptions.]
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:10 a.m.
Order!
Order! Communities in Jaman North (Electricity)
Q. 697. Mr. S. Addai (on behalf of Mr. Alex Asum-Ahensah) asked the Minister for Energy when the following communities in Jaman North constituency would be connected to the National Electricity Grid: (i) Duadaso Nos. I and II, (ii) Mayera, (iii) Kokoa, (iv) Dawiri, (v) Nwamsua, (vi) Buni, (vii) Jinankor, and (viii) Korase.
Mr. Adda 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Duadaso, Buni, Kokoa and Jinakor communities form part of the Ministry's ongoing electrification programme. Installation works are ongoing. The project in the communities is scheduled for completion by the end of the year 2007.
The Mayera, Dawiri, Nwamsua and Korase form part of the SHEP-4 Programme. They however do not form part of the ongoing SHEP-4, Phase-I project. The communities would be connected in the subsequent phases of the programme in line with the implementation schedule and the availability of funding.
Mr. Gyetuah 11:10 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to find out from the hon. Minister whether his Ministry has plans to bear the total cost of the rural electrification programme since the urban areas are better in terms of finances, as compared to the rural settings.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
Hon. Member, make sure your supplementary question relates to the substantive question. It does not.

Communities in Binduri Constituency (Electricity)

Q. 723. Mr. Mark Anthony Awuni asked the Minister for Energy when electricity from the National Grid would be extended to the following communities in the Binduri constituency: (i) Zawse; (ii) Nayoko; (iii) Atuba; (iv) Gumyoko; (v) Kaadi; (vi) Kukparigu; and (vii) Zaago.
Mr. Adda 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Zawse, Nayoko, Atuba, Gumyoko, Kaadi, Kukparigu and Zaago communities do not form part of the Ministry's ongoing electrification programme. They may apply for consideration under the SHEP if they meet the eligibility criteria.
Mr. Awuni 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that the hon. Minister has given such an Answer. Let me remind him that on the floor of this House, his predecessor, hon. Mike Oquaye, accepted the fact that these communities were under SHEP- 4, and that work could be started when funds were made available. But for him to say that all these communities are not

on the Ministry's programme, then I am surprised.

Therefore, I want to ask: what are the eligibility criteria that the hon. Minister wants my community to know?
Mr. Adda 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the eligibility criteria involve one-third of the community wiring their houses, the communities making low voltage poles available; and they must be within 20 km, at least, of the high tension system.
Mr. Speaker, what I imagine my hon. predecessor might have said -- I am not so sure he was talking about just a discussion, or what was on record as a formal application. To my knowledge there is no formal application for these communities.
Mr. Awuni 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the only community that has been awarded on contract within my constituency -- I want to find out from the hon. Minister, because work is not going on. When does he think the work will be continued and completed for commissioning?
Mr. Adda 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, he has not mentioned specifically any community in his constituency; and at this stage, I am not aware of the constituency or what specifically he is talking about so if he may clarify.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
Hon.
Member for Binduri, can you specify for the information of the hon. Minister?
Mr. Awuni 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, that is Binduri township.
Mr. Adda 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, generally, as I have been indicating, we have been constrained in terms of financing. Therefore, it has been difficult to get all
these projects completed on schedule. We are in the process of paying some of the contractors and consultants that we owe; and as soon as that is done -- if that is the constraint holding back electrification in this community -- I am sure the work will come back on.
Communities in Anlo Constituency (Electricity)
Q. 724. Mr. Clement Kofi Humado asked the Minister for Energy when the following communities in the Anlo constituency would be connected to the National Electricity Grid: (i) Bleamezado, (ii) Tregui, (iii) Trekume, (iv) Azanu, (v) Adzato and (vi) Benadzi.
Mr. Adda 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Bleamezado, Tregui, Trekume, Azanu, Adzato and Benadzi communities do not form part of the Ministry's ongoing electrification programme. They may apply for consideration under the SHEP if they meet the eligibility criteria.
Mr. Humado 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, in the Answer of the hon. Minister, he indicated that we do not form part of the Ministry's ongoing electrification programme and that we may apply for consideration, if we meet the eligibility criteria.
I wish to find out from the hon. Minister whether he did not find the application from the community, duly signed by the District Chief Executive, a cover note from the Member of Parliament of the area, that is myself; and letters from the chiefs and the Assembly Members of the area, alongside maps in the handing-over notes of his predecessor, (hon. Mike Oquaye)? This issue was discussed with his predecessor, in the presence of Mr.
Darkwa, the Chief Director. An officer was assigned to me, to go to the grounds with me to confirm the situation.
I would like to find out from the hon. Minister whether this information is not available to him.
Mr. Adda 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Emmanuel Ashie Darkwa is not the Chief Director of the Ministry; I want to make that correction first.
Mr. Speaker, secondly, I want to bring to the attention of my hon. Colleagues that we consider a formal application to be one that meets the eligibility criteria. In their submission, they must indicate that, indeed, one-third of the houses there have been wired and that they have the low voltage poles available; and that they are close to the 20 km range of the grid. If these concrete things are not spelt out in their submission, we do not consider it as a formal application.
Mr. Humado 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would
like to find out from the hon. Minister whether he would allow me to bring copies of the application letters stating that we have met the eligibility criteria to his office for reconsideration under SHEP -4.
Mr. Adda 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would be more than happy to receive him and examine the documentation, and if they meet the criteria, we will work on it as speedily as we can.
Dr. Kwame Ampofo 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to know from the hon. Minister whether the application for electrification from these areas has received acknowledgement; that he has acknowledged receipt to the applicants, and written to them explaining that they do not meet the eligibility criteria.
Mr. Adda 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, indeed, as my hon. Colleague who asked the substantive Question indicated, there were consultations with my predecessor, and I imagine that they would have acknowledged receipt at the time.
Mr. A. K. Agbesi 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, Bleamezado, Tregui, Trekume, Azanu, Adzato, Benadzi are all areas which are totally in darkness. It is a vast area of this country. I want to know from the hon. Minister whether they do not form part of the ongoing process because they do not qualify; or they have not made the application.
I want to know from the hon. Minister whether as a Ministry, tasked to see to electrifying this country, the Ministry has any plans for such areas which have not taken it upon themselves to do something. What plans has the Ministry for these people? Because it is a vast area of the Volta Region.
Mr. Adda 11:20 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, indeed, we
have notified some of our Colleagues, our District Chief Executives that the whole system of rural electrification needs to be revised. In the reform programme of the sector, we are considering the possibility of setting up a rural electrification agency and a rural electrification fund; these we think would help to address some of these matters.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:20 a.m.
That will be all for Question time. Thank you, hon. Minister for Energy, for appearing before the House to answer Questions. You are discharged. Hon. Kamel Ford, is it the case that you withdrew your Statement? [Pause] -- Very well, so we will go to Public Business --
PAPERS 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Very well.
By the Deputy Minister for Lands, Forestry and Mines (on behalf of the Minister for Lands, Forestry and Mines) --
Amendment to the Mining Lease dated 5th March 1994 between the Government of the Republic of Ghana and Ashanti Goldfields Company Limited.
Referred to Committee on Mines and Energy.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Item (7) -- Motion.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 11:30 a.m.
May we take item (8), Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Let us hear what is happening to motion 7.
Mr. Kofi Osei-Ameyaw 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, can motion 7 be deferred? There are still negotiations going on in relation to that.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Very well, I think that is what the Leadership agreed. So we go to item (8).
BILLS -- CONSIDERATION 11:30 a.m.
STAGE 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, on the last occasion when this matter was before the House, there was a counter- amendment -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Hon. Member, are you going to move an amendment or something?
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:30 a.m.
No, we have already moved the amendment.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
But I have not seen indication of Consideration.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, we went beyond this process. In fact, the amendment was moved and there was some debate. In fact, what we have here is “debate to continue”, but I believe that the Chairman has some announcements to make.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Very well, let us hear the Chairman.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, on the last occasion when this matter was before the House, there was an issue as to whether the period within which a convicted person under this Bill should serve and the Committee was directed to go and look at the period again. Upon a second meeting, Mr. Speaker, the Committee decided that the original amendment proposed must stand. You can see on the Order Paper that there is a counter-amendment being made on clause (1) which says that “subclause (1) at the end delete ‘four years' and substitute ‘five years' and not more than ten years”.
The Committee is of the view that the “ten years” and “25 years” must stand. However, in the wisdom of the Members of this House, if the opinion is that the original amendment proposed is too harsh and questionable then the House can adopt that.
However, Mr. Speaker, let me give the Committee's rationale for maintaining the original position which is 10 years to 25 years. Mr. Speaker, if you look at article
Mr. E. K. D. Adjaho 11:30 a.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, I do not know but the hon. Deputy Majority Leader in his introduction said that the Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs was going to make an announcement. This morning, I believe there was a certain understanding; now he is going back to justify the amendment.
We just want to know what he is doing. Are we taking the amendment? Is he insisting on the amendment? Is he withdrawing it? Are we taking the one that stands in the name of hon. Haruna Iddrisu? Let us be very clear as to exactly what we are doing. What is the announcement that his leader said he is going to make? We want to hear it.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Hon. Deputy Minority Leader, of course, I was monitoring his movement to give appropriate directions. So let us hear him; maybe, he is making preliminary remarks to give you the announcement. So please, let us hear him. Hon. Member, the understanding is that you have move the amendment.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:30 a.m.
Yes.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Make it clear, are you giving further explanation to your amendment or you want to change your position, and whether you are giving an announcement to the House. [Laughter.] Let us get it clearly.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am giving further explanation and information to the House; I am not making any announcement as yet.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Very well, go ahead -- [Interruptions.]
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:30 a.m.
I said “as yet'; and
“not as yet”. Mr. Speaker, article 15 of the 1992 Constitution states quite clearly, and I read:
“(1) The dignity of all persons shall be inviolable.
(2) No person shall, whether or not he is arrested, restricted or detained, be subjected to --
(a) torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
Mr. Speaker, equally, article 26 (2) states clearly that 11:30 a.m.
“All customary practices which dehumanise or are injurious to the physical and mental well-being of a person are prohibited.”
Mr. Haruna Iddrisu 11:30 a.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, with respect, I need your guidance. I think that you had invited the hon. Member to move an amendment. He has gone on to quote constitutional articles and we do not know -- It is to support what? If it is in support of his earlier amendment, let him say so; if he is conceding to an amendment, let him say so, and if he is making an announcement, let him make the declaration.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Hon. Member, I think the point has been made clear; he has said that he is continuing his argument for his amendment. Please, go on.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, perhaps he should listen; he should keep his ears quite open.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:30 a.m.
Hon. Member, please go on.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:30 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, in Nadowli in the Upper West Region, when the Committee met the people, a nurse recounted her harrowing experience. Indeed, the woman has had four children but according to her every child that she delivered required caesarean section.
Mr. E. K. D. Adjaho 11:30 a.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, I am afraid the hon. Chairman is out of order. What he is trying to do is to go back to the Second Reading. We are not talking about the principles of the Bill; we are looking at it clause by clause. He had moved the amendment; other Members wanted to speak but Mr. Speaker directed that the matter should be looked at again. So Leadership met and took a certain position and communicated this to the hon. Chairman of the Committee. But now his leader says that he should make the announcement; he has defied the orders of his leader. [Laughter.] We have to make progress because if it is the same amendment, we have heard him move the amendment already.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Hon.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.


Chairman of the Committee, the character of your argument goes to principles when you begin quoting the Constitution. Your argument ought to zero in on the period of the penalty. If you have any point to raise on that you may do so. But if you go the way you are going, you are treading on Second Reading of the Bill; and so please take note.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
would like the House to understand that even in offences such as defilement where a child is defined as 16 years and below, when a child of the age of 16 consents to sexual intercourse with an adult, the person who commits the offence is given twenty five-years. I just want hon. Members to understand what we are dealing with. Also, in the case of rape the sentencing period is twenty-five years.
Mr. Lee Ocran 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Hon.
Member, you are out of order. The hon. Member was properly making his argument.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
just want to inform my hon. Colleague that those offences -- rape, defilement and others -- are sexual offences and the offender must have a certain kind of moral
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Deputy
Majority Leader, you can appropriately make your case when you speak against the amendment. Hon. Member, please go on.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, it

The hon. Member for Jomoro got up and said that “cutting something small”; that is what he said -- [Interruptions] -- and he must be made to withdraw that.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Order!
Order! Hon. Chairman of the Committee, please do not be diverted; please go on and conclude your speech.
Mr. Lee Ocran 11:40 a.m.
On a point of order.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. Chairman of the Committee has mentioned my name. I did not say “cutting something small”; I said that defilement, rape and whatever he was mentioning have nothing to do with cutting something. I did not say “cutting something small”. In any case, I have supported the ten years. I do not want this to go on record that I said “something small”.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Hon.
Member for Jomoro, please resume your seat. Hon. Chairman of the Committee, it is not true that they were trivializing the offence. He only did not see the connection and I ruled that you were making your points properly, and so please do not veer into that area. Continue with
your legitimate argument.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:40 a.m.
And so, Mr.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Hon.
Member, leave the sentiments of the House aside and just make your arguments. The sentiments of the House would be shown by the votes.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
for the Committee this is a heinous and barbaric crime and we should send a message out so that those who are practising it stop.
Alhaji. Sumani Abukari 11:40 a.m.
On a
point of order. Mr. Speaker, I think that the hon. Chairman of the Committee should withdraw the words, “heinous and barbaric”. He is describing a people's culture as heinous and barbaric. If he says it is outmoded, or it should be refined or modernized, that is understandable. But to say that means he is telling the people that they are heinous and barbaric, that is their culture.
The fact that he does not practise it does not mean it is heinous and barbaric; in my area, we do not practise it but I am not going to stand here and allow the hon. Member to insult the people because they have a culture that he thinks is out of date. He should withdraw the words “heinous and barbaric” and put it in better terms.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, what
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Order!
Order! Hon. Chairman of the Committee, the provision of the Constitution you read did not support the words you used. Secondly, there has been an urge for education. You do not convince people to change their mental attitudes by descriptions that provoke their anger, and so you are advised to withdraw those words.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Hon.
Member, I have ruled on the matter.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, if
your ruling is that I should withdraw, then I do so.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:40 a.m.
Very
well. That is over, please go on.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Constitution clearly prohibits this act. And Mr. Speaker, what I was saying earlier on is that when the Committee went up north to Nadowli, a woman recounted her story which was so sad and I thought hon. Members would like to hear it. I have stated my position quite clearly and my position is that in defilement, one can be put away for twenty-five years; also in rape one can be put away for twenty-five years.
However, in this day and age, female genital mutilation, if one commits that offence which Parliament seeks to prohibit and one cannot be put away for twenty-five years, then Members should be aware that we are not being consistent and we are not standardizing our laws. And so, Mr. Speaker, this is a matter for the House. I have made my position very clear.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I said
earlier that the two categories are different. Rape, defilement and others are sexual
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 11:40 a.m.


offences and the kind of intention that one must have before committing that offence is barbaric, if I may use the hon. Chairman's words. But this one is at worst causing harm. It is a cultural practice that we seek to abolish because it is harmful or injurious.

So one cannot equate the two offences

when it comes to sentencing, as if they were the same. The intention of a rapist can put him off for about a hundred years; I understand that. Intention is important in sentencing and I think the hon. Chairman knows that.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Hon. Chairman, to make the work simple, nobody is disputing that it is unacceptable. The Constitution forbids it; nobody is against that. You are just trying to convince hon. Members about the length of period of incarceration. So when you concentrate on that, you are likely to make better progress.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Order.
Hon. Member, please just concentrate on the essentials and end your debate.
Mr. A. K. Agbesi 11:50 a.m.
On a point of order.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that this Report is before the House. I want to disagree with my Chairman; I am a Ranking Member of the Committee. We considered this matter when Mr. Speaker referred it back to us.

We are here for our Chairman to inform the House that we were not able to take a decision at the committee level. The matter had come back before the House for the debate to continue based upon the amendment that has been proposed. After that the House can take a decision. But it appears that my Chairman is taking us back.

So I want to say that the issue is simple. There is an amendment on the sentencing. Your Committee could not agree or otherwise. So the debate is simply on the issue of sentencing. How many years are we agreeing on? And then we move on. It is for my Chairman to make this simple announcement to the House and then we move forward. Mr. Speaker, this is my point of information to the House.
Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:50 a.m.
On a point
of order. Mr. Speaker, if the Committee adopts a position this House can revoke it. In fact, the final power does not rest with the Committee so if the Committee even sticks to a position it can be amended by this House; and I believe that is what we may do. But I think it is incorrect for the hon. Member for Ashaiman to say that the Committee could not come to a decision.
We might not have come to a consensus but certainly the majority view was that this should be the position of the Committee. So a decision was taken. The fact that he did not agree with that does not mean that a decision was not taken. The majority decision was that they should stick to this. It is only for the Chairman to restate the position of the Committee and leave the rest to the House; and he has laboured and belaboured that point for far too long. That is what we call on you to rule.
Let him land somewhere and we plead with him that he should not crash-land. He should land and allow us to take a decision.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Hon.
Chairman, I think you would take a cue from this. There is another amendment counter to the position you are taking so you just have to crisply state your position. You have tried to convince the House. You have done well, but let them also argue on the other side and then we would take a decision. So please, I hope you are landing very soon.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
in fact, I do not want to belabour the points I have made. The points are quite clear. What I want hon. Members to advert their minds to -- and I know the Committee's work is not sacrosanct or the Committee's recommendation has no -- [Inter-ruption.] The Committee's work is subject to the approval of the House and at the end of the day I want the House to look at rape, to look at defilement, to look at the sentencing and then take a decision. With that, I land.
Several hon. Members -- rose --
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Hon.
Members, resume your seats. According to what happened during the last Sitting this amendment was moved, another amendment was moved and debate was to continue on both. He has presented his final debate on his and it is appropriate that the one who moved the other amendment should also conclude his debate, and that is hon. Haruna Iddrisu.
Mr. Haruna Iddrisu 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker,
I beg to move, clause 1, subclause (1), at end, delete “four years” and substitute “five years and not more than ten years”.
In doing so I stand opposed to the
amendment proposed by the Chairman of the Committee for “10 years and not more than 25 years”.
Mr. Speaker, this House is unanimous in wanting to condemn an outmoded cultural practice. We are unanimous that it is an outmoded cultural practice and we need to take punitive measures against it, but the problem has to do with 25 years and 10 years. We are talking of a minimum and a maximum and I am very glad that Mr. Second Deputy Speaker himself comes from northern Ghana and he may have a better appreciation of some of these issues.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
Hon.
Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, you
know the culture of the people.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
I can
assure you that this practice you are talking about, I have never heard of it.
Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:50 a.m.
I am aware, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 11:50 a.m.
This
is because it is not practised in my area.
Mr. H. Iddrisu 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, you
would appreciate the argument I am coming to make. You are aware that in the north -- I am not restricting you to the north; I am making a point, please. If you report a person to the police in the north, it is likely that the person may not even want to greet you for the rest of his life. This is the point I was going to make in discussing with hon. Members -- I am just telling them to appreciate the value that a minimum of five years custodial sentence is enough punitive measure to

deter people from this practice.

Mr. Speaker, since the first amendment

was made to the Criminal Procedure Code on “female circumcision” which we have now changed to “female genital mutilation”, he knows, if I ask him to give me statistics of how many people have been convicted in the last five years or more, he cannot name even five people; because the people have changed on the basis of public education and not because somebody has put a harsh punitive sentence necessarily in the Criminal Procedure Code.

We are arguing that we can cure this problem more with education. Let the people appreciate -- Like he has quoted article 26 of the 1992 Constitution, that this practice is inhuman, this practice is injurious -- we are unanimous on it but we are saying that 25 years is too much.

Mr. Speaker, armed robbery, has it stopped? It is still on the ascendancy yet the punishment in the Criminal Procedure Code -- Even murder, the sentencing has not stopped murder. And I remember the last time I argued that deterrence is not the only object for punishment. You need to give people opportunity to reform. You need to give people opportunity to rehabilitate and we are saying that for those who do this, five years as a minimum and 10 years maximum is just enough.

So, Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, and I urge hon. Members to support this further amendment to the Committee's amend-ment. We are not saying that do not punish them; but let the punishment be such as can deter and give opportunity for reformation. Mr. Speaker, I beg to move.
Dr. Paa Kwesi Nduom noon
Mr. Speaker,
I rise to oppose this amendment proposed by hon. Haruna Iddrisu. I rise to oppose that amendment rather vigorously. Mr.
Speaker, this particular matter we are talking about is really something that is characteristic of the moral fabric and even some of the extra-legal matters to do with our society. We have heard the words. Some say it is an outmoded cultural practice.
Mr. Speaker, this is not just any outmoded cultural practice; it is something that dehumanises persons. This is not just something that causes harm. People talk about bodily harm and compare it to, maybe, a little injury on your finger or your feet. It is not just a little bodily harm. It is a permanent harm that can even ensure that a person is not able to bear children.

Indeed, it can cause diseases and it can lead to death. So Mr. Speaker, it is not something that we should sit here as representatives of the people and compare to even simple rape. Mr. Speaker, after rape a person can live but with this practice a person can die. Mr. Speaker, this is actually more injurious to a person than rape. Mr. Speaker, let us not misplace our priorities here.
Mr. S. K. B. Manu noon
On a point of
order. Mr. Speaker, my point of order is that rape is not a simple thing. To call it “simple rape”? - Rape? I wish the women groups were here today. Rape is as inhuman as the point that he is canvassing for. Those who rape go in with the intention not to cause harm, they do not have any diabolic intention though they end up harming the person even for life.
Therefore to say that rape is a simple act, I seriously beg to differ. He will have to withdraw and apologize to women who have ever been raped.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker noon
Hon.
Member for Ahafo Ano South (Mr. Manu), he has expressed an opinion, you disagree with the opinion. That does not call for
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker noon


withdrawal. Please, go on.
Dr. Nduom noon
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact, voluntarily, I withdraw the use of the word ‘simple' to qualify rape. Rape definitely is a serious matter, but Mr. Speaker, my point is, this is a more serious matter than rape and I am saying that when it comes to cultural practises, we in Ghana and sometimes we in Africa tend to hide many things that injure people.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to cultural practices, we tend to hide certain things that hurt us; we tend to sweep certain things under the carpet; and we must not tolerate that. The hon. Member was talking about education. Yes, I am all for education. We have been trying to educate our people for a very long time but when something causes irreparable damage, irreparable harm, and indeed it takes away some of what God has given which no person should take away, Mr. Speaker, the people of this House, the people who sit here with the people's mandate should not belittle the matter.
Therefore, I support the original amendment moved by the Chairman of your Committee. All of us should put all these other things aside and act with one voice, as one House to let the people of Ghana know that matters of this kind, we will not tolerate. We will ensure that everybody in the world also knows that this is one act we do not want to come into the modern age and we will punish anybody who crosses the line and make sure that they understand the grievous nature of the act.
Mr. Freddy Blay noon
Mr. Speaker, I also
rise in this particular instance to express my sentiments. Indeed, my sentiments go along with what the hon. Member for Tamale South (Mr. Haruna Iddrisu)
has said. Indeed I am against what the previous hon. Member who spoke, my very good friend, hon. Dr. Nduom has said; and I am against the Committee's report.
Mr. Speaker, hon. Dr. Nduom just said
that this is a very serious matter and we should not play with it. I think that is a very wrong impression. I am not too sure this House is playing with the issue that we are handling. I believe that that was why the day before yesterday, Mr. Speaker did say that we should stand it down and have a little consultation over it. It is interesting that it has come to the House.
Just as hon. Iddrisu said, this is a very bad and abnormal practice and that it is a practice that we should say no to and indeed we have already expressed our sentiment; we say no to it. It is repugnant and we are loud about it, but our loudness is not just a question of imposing a punishment of about 25 years or minimum of 10 years. It says nothing; it did say that it is not only deterrence that you could use to stop a practice.
Fortunately, or unfortunately, this is a cultural practice that has been embedded in some of our societies. Indeed, it is not only in Ghana but even West Africa. Among the Arabs, it is even worse. We have all agreed that it is bad to mutilate the private parts of a woman; it is a very bad thing.
Mr. J. A. Ndebugre noon
On a point
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker noon
Hon.
Member, are you saying you have a point of information?
Mr. Ndebugre noon
It is a point of
information which will be useful for the hon. Member.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker noon
Let me
first find out. Do you yield to the point of information?
Mr. Blay noon
Mr. Speaker, I do not yield
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker noon
Very
well. So (hon. Ndebugre) resume your seat. Please, go on.
Mr. Blay noon
Mr. Speaker, what we are
saying is that as lawmakers, we appreciate the cultural milieu within which we are making this law. We are using the law as a tool for social engineering, but this engineering has to do with what has been embedded -- has been practised. It is amazing that we all realise it.
Sometimes it is parents of the children, or the daughters themselves who undertake this practice. I do not believe that a parent wants to harm his or her own daughter by undertaking this practice. But we all agree that they do not know the risks, but if they do not know and you would want to correct it, the correction is not just 25 years imprisonment. People would even find it very unreasonable.
If we want to correct something which has been done over years by our people, or to protect our daughters against something which we in this modern age think is wrong, the answer is not to impose 25 years imprisonment and push them in.
It is particularly wrong for those of us who may not even be within that cultural group which practises it to want to assume the high, moral ground. It is not appropriate for us to think that we know better than anybody else and we would want this thing to be done so harshly to the extent that parents and others should be imprisoned. We are saying that let the prison sentence be there, but do not make it so harsh that it is almost unreasonable.
Dr. Nduom 12:10 p.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, the hon. First Deputy Speaker was making some assertions that those of us speaking against his position are acting as if we know better than others. Mr. Speaker, that is not so and I do not think that is a proper way to characterize the sentiments of those of us who feel strongly that this outmoded cultural practice should be heavily condemned and therefore heavily sanctioned. Mr. Speaker, that characterization is something the hon. Member and my comrade should not make; and I object to it.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
First
Deputy Speaker, you take his sentiments on board.
Mr. Blay. Mr. Speaker, I am just
about to conclude. I am not trying to create the impression that those who are the protagonists for the 10 years minimum and the 25 years maximum are tryinbg to know more or trying to show better understanding or they lack the understanding of the issue that we are talking about.
I agree, and we all have agreed in principle that this is a bad practice and we should be against it; and indeed we have made a law against it. The issue we are talking about is the sentence and we are saying that -- In fact, it has been articulated by hon. Iddrisu -- It is not the deterrence alone that we should use or apply to fight a problem within the society. It is a combination, a mix of all practices that we can use to fight it. More importantly, we should use education.
For that reason, I am saying that it does not solve any problem. It will not help the societies which practise it to make it look like that practice should attract 10 years
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.


minimum and 25 years maximum. We are saying that here in this House, our attitude should be more a question of appreciating that particular problem and trying to alleviate it or cut it short or fight it.

We should not rely only on deterrence and make it look as though we have, all of a sudden come from the old age into the modern age to the extent that once we make that law, everybody, illiterate or literate, will appreciate it and not do the wrong thing. I do not think it would serve any useful purpose. For that reason, I strongly support the amendment that was proposed by hon. Iddrisu and disagree and indeed, oppose the amendment proposed by the Chairman and majority of the Members of the Committee.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:10 p.m.
I see
that a lot of interest is generated in this debate but it is clear that positions are clearly defined and we do not need to dwell on it too much. The decision will come by vote but let us hear the hon. Deputy Minority Leader.
Mr. E. K. D. Adjaho 12:10 p.m.
Thank you very
Mr. Ndebugre 12:10 p.m.
On a point of order.
Mr. Speaker, this is the same point of order I wanted to raise against the hon. First Deputy Speaker. It is not true that the initiators of the Bill wanted to increase the sentence to only four years. The original penalty proposed by the Bill is that anybody -- I will read it so that it will be very clear.
“Whoever carries out Female
Genital Mutilation (FGM) . . . commits an offence, and is liable on summary conviction to imprison- ment for a term of not less than four years, which includes 10 years, 25 years, 50 years, 100 years.”
What the Committee did was to put a cap and looking at the seriousness of the offence, we put an upper limit of 25 years which is still better than “not less than four years” because “not less than four years” include 100 years; it includes the millennium. So for him to say that the Government just wanted to increase it to only four years is absolutely incorrect. The intention was to increase the sentence to four years ad infinitum and the Committee is doing well to limit it to between 10 years and 25 years, having regard to the gravity of the offence.
Mr. Adjaho 12:10 p.m.
The point being made
was that the Bill from Government wants to make the minimum sentence four years. That is the point being made. Mr. Speaker, you will know that even when you are convicted for an attempt to commit the offence, even where there is no harm at all the punishment is the same as if it has been committed. So for FGM, the punishment will be the same.
Mr. Speaker, if you have been in the criminal law practice, and I know you have been, you will come across certain situations where the punishment is such that the thing has not actually happened. It has not happened, just an attempt and yet you have to impose a certain kind of sentence; and you will find yourself in difficulty.
I am happy that the House agreed that there should be stiffer punishment -- both sides of the House, every hon. Member of this House. This House equally agrees that it should be accompanied by education
Mr. Adjaho 12:10 p.m.


because we believe that education must go on. I do not believe the mere fact of legislation is going to solve the problem. We also agree on that. The only problem is whether the maximum should be 25 years.

Mr. Speaker, honestly speaking, I think that in areas like attempts where the actual offence has not been committed and yet we might find people imposing those types of sentences, that is my difficulty. Therefore, it is better in these circumstances to take the 10 years as the maximum and 5 years as the minimum and I think it is very reasonable. Mr. Speaker, 10 years, in this country, by all standards as punishment, is stiff.

Mr. Speaker, that is all that we are saying and I think that the House should take into account this point about attempt, where the act does not actually take place -- there is only an attempt -- and there are certain situations so that each case can be looked at on its own merit.

Mr. Speaker, this Bill itself was brought into, I think the First Parliament and the Government now thinks that there is the need to make the punishment stiffer. If it goes again and there is still a problem, I do not see why Government cannot bring back the Bill for us to amend. I do not see why we keep on wasting so much time on this matter. Mr. Speaker, I support the amendment standing in the name of hon. Haruna Iddrisu.
Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:20 p.m.
Mr.
Speaker, I also rise to support the amendment proposed by hon. Haruna Iddrisu. Mr. Speaker, in fact the intent of this amendment is to reform a manifestly outmoded cultural practice. As the Chairman of the Committee said, we all agree that indeed the practice as per article 15(2) of the Constitution is cruel.
We agree it is inhuman. We agree it is a degrading treatment. Mr. Speaker, we agree it is punitive and that is why we need to address it.
Mr. Speaker, but as has been canvassed, reform is not dependent solely on deterrence. Education, we have all agreed, is the key. Mr. Speaker, the only issue that I would want to add is to let us consider the age of the practitioners. One realizes that the practitioners are the elderly, old women. Mr. Speaker, they need to be educated that the practice is no longer tolerable, apart from the ill- treatment that it inflicts on the victims, apart from the diseases that they could introduce into the physique of the victims.

Mr. Speaker, imagine sentencing a 70 year old lady to a prison term of 25 years. Mr. Speaker, that clearly is sentencing them to death and I believe that is what we should advert our minds to for which reason I agree entirely with the amendment proposed by hon. Haruna Iddrisu. Mr. Speaker, because we have the hon. Minister responsible for Women and Children's Affairs we could also hear her. I believe she agrees with the proposal made by hon. Haruna Iddrisu regardless of the intimidation she is being subjected to by the Chairman of the Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I rest my case.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
Order! Order! I will take two more contributions.
Mr. J. Y. Chireh 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Committee's work was to put a maximum for this sentence. If you put a maximum, it does not necessarily mean that the Judge is going to go there. The Judge is likely to look at the age, the circumstances and everything else in this arrangement.
rose
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
Hon. Member, do you have a point of order?
Ahaji Sorogho: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I want to be guided. He says that the act is a second degree felony. I want to know from which book, or which law he is quoting because he cannot just get up and say it and go scot-free. He is deceiving the House.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
You would have made a better point of order if you came out and said he was wrong because that is not the case.
Alhaji Sorogho 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what I am saying. What he is saying is not the correct thing. It is not a second degree felony and for that reason he should know how to argue his case.
Mr. Chireh 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the harassment I am suffering I understand but I also have my opinion to express on this matter -- [Interruption.]
rose
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
Let us be sure we are raising genuine points
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.


of order.
Mr. J. K. Gidisu 12:20 p.m.
Just like my Colleague who spoke earlier challenged his assertion that it was a second degree felony -- if a relation of his suffered that, why did he not take it up even at the initial law courts when there was no such stiff punishment?
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
Hon. Member, you are out of order. Hon. Chireh, please go on, make your argument crisp.
Mr. Chireh 12:20 p.m.
The argument again is whether in terms of comparison those who rape or defile, they have the intention. Of course, having made a law, having passed the Act, if somebody commits the offence it becomes criminal and anybody who is brought before the Court you must show evidence that this person was aware of this law, he intends to commit the offence and there is no way that anybody can tell you that a crime that has been -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Joe Baidoe-Ansah 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, my hon. Friend is misleading the House. He just said that anyone who is brought to court will have to prove that he knows or she knows about the law. That is not the case. Ignorance of the law can never be an excuse. It is not a defence in court. So I would wish that he withdraws that part of his statement.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
Hon. Member, you heard the point raised -- He is saying you are misleading the House. You may wish to withdraw that.
Mr. Chireh 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am not misleading the House. If you look at the Constitution and even the Interpretation Act, it requires that every law we pass here be published in the Gazette for it to be a notice to everybody. Therefore it is presumed that the knowledge is with the people. In addition to those people
Mr. Doe Adjaho 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member on the floor made a categorical statement that when you are brought to court they have to determine your knowledge of the law before they sentence you; and that is what the hon. Deputy Minister drew his attention to.
Mr. Speaker, it is not true. That statement is categorically wrong and for us to be taken more seriously on the floor of this House he must do the honourable thing and withdraw that statement and continue with his submission.
Mr. Chireh 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, awareness of the law is what I will substitute. Everybody is supposed to be aware of the law. Therefore, if you are aware and we are going to do the education in addition to this stiffer punishment -- In fact, if you go and tell the person, “look, if you do not agree with what I am saying, 25 years . . .” they will readily agree to it. So I am completely in agreement with the Chairman of this Committee that the cap be at 25 years. Thank you.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:20 p.m.
Before I come to you, I said I was taking two more but I have not heard from the women. So let me hear from the hon. Minister for Women and Children's Affairs.
Minister for Women and Children's Affairs (Hajia Alima Mahama) 12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am quite happy about this debate and my only hope is that when other issues come up on the rights of women and children, this kind of support will be there and we will want to add stiffer punishment in such regard. I hope that this is not going to be the only instance.
Sometimes, we know that this is an activity that women are involved in; most of those who engage in the excision are women. So I was just wondering whether it is because it is women who will be suffering the punishment that we are
Mr. Mahama Ayariga 12:20 p.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, this House is very committed to the welfare of men, women, children, the old and the young. And I believe that we have taken every issue that has been brought to us with all the seriousness that they deserve. So for the hon. Minister to create an impression that this is the first time she is witnessing a phenomenal level of excitement about this matter and to perceive that it is possible that women are likely to suffer that is why we are that excited, is to create a very wrong impression about this House.
Mr. Speaker, I will urge her that that particular statement should be withdrawn. We will continue supporting matters concerning women.
Mr. I. A. B. Fuseini 12:20 p.m.
On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, it seems the hon. Minister made a statement that suggests that this Bill is targeted at women. That is very, very erroneous and must not be allowed to stand as such because the Bill aims at capturing people who participate who may be women accessories, or abettors who may be men and who will suffer the same consequencies. So this Bill is not targeted at women and if that impression is being created in this House, then such an impression must be corrected.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Hon. Minister, the point he made is that your intervention had a suggestion that it appears because it was women who were to suffer the penalty the enthusiasm rose the way it did. There is a protestation against that. If that was your intention, you may do the right thing and then withdraw that aspect.
Hajia Mahama: Mr. Speaker that is
not my intention. I am just saying that inside me, I am excited about this debate. I am just thinking that for the first time this is a Bill that majority of people who are likely to suffer the sanctions it spells out are women. I am excited about that. It is not an indictment on the House, so I do not see their concern here.
Also, I am not saying it is only women; I am saying that the majority of people who are likely to suffer are women because they carry out the excision. That is all I am saying. I am not saying that the House is one thing or the other.
Mr. Speaker, if I may continue. I have with me information from Free Encyclopedia that provides the information about the punishment in other countries. In Senegal where female genital mutilation (FGM) is prevalent, the sentences range from one to five; in Tanzania it ranges from five to fifteen; in Togo it ranges from two months to ten years. In Djibouti, it is a five-year prison term; in Central African Republic it is one month and one day to two years.
Mr. Speaker, there are various other areas. In Canada, it is fourteen years; in Australia it is seven to fifteen years and in France it is twenty years. Definitely, it is not the normal practice in these countries.
Mr. Speaker, I am not so much worried about the maximum term because the practice has been that most of the time,
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.


sentences given are usually the minimum. So to put the maximum term at twenty years, I am not worried about that. But I will propose that we keep the minimum of five years and maximum of twenty years. That is an amendment proposed.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
As
I said, I had not heard much from the ladies. I am going to call the hon. Deputy Minister, Mrs. Angelina Baiden-Amissah.
rose
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Hon. Member for Bawku, do you have a point of order?
Mr. Ayariga 12:30 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker. First, I seek a direction from you and then I have a point of order on what she just said. I think the hon. Minister moved for a further amendment because she is proposing five years minimum, and twenty-five years maximum and I do not know what direction Mr. Speaker is going to give regarding that.
As for her surprise that some hon. Members are raising it as a cultural issue, on the other side, you only need to read the literature. You only need to observe what is around and you will realize that it is not just that hon. Members are saying that it is a culture.
It is a fact that many people have practised it over the years and so when you use the words “It is a cultural thing”, you are simply stating what is a matter of fact. And indeed, if you read the Memorandum to the Bill and the discussions that have taken place, they keep referring to it as
a heinous cultural practice. There is no doubt about that. Even though it is bad the reality is that it was and is and might continue to be a cultural practice.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Very
well, I think I got from the hon. Minister for Women and Children's Affairs that she was just referring the House to the kind of sentences that happen in other places. Was that the case?
Hajia Mahama: Mr. Speaker, I proposed twenty-five years maximum and five years minimum.
Mrs. Baiden-Amissah 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
it means there are three amendments on the floor and I am speaking in support of the earlier one. Mr. Speaker, we are talking of the one proposed by the Chairman -- between ten and years to twenty-five years.
Mr. Speaker, I am saying this because this matter of culture does not come in. In 2002, your Committee on Gender and Children moved to certain parts of the North. In fact, the Assembly organized groups for us to interact with and when we sensitized them, what the men told us was that this is not being perpetrated by the men, that the men do not even look at the place when they are entering.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Hon.
Deputy Minister, let us take a point of order. Order!
An hon. Member: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Minister said they went to the North and they were able to use two weeks to educate the people over there. I do not know how they could have used two weeks to educate a group of people who have adopted a cultural practice from generation
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:30 p.m.
Hon. Member, you are out of order. You can give education which is inadequate but you would have given the education.
Mrs. Baiden-Amissah 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,

Hajia Mahama: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Education has been done, education has been going on and I even give credit to the various institutions. The communities themselves have set up watchdogs and the education has been going on. But I object to the use of “adamant” and “going on”.

If you go to a community and talk about something that has been happening for centuries, education needs to be consistent and needs to move. But we should not use words to describe the people who are in this practice as if they are in another world altogether and they do not understand what is happening. This has been their practice and I agree that it is something that we must all work against. We must sanction and we must ensure that it is stopped but we must be careful in the choice of words to describe them.
Mrs. Baiden-Amissah 12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
I said they are adamant because the men from the court started pointing accusing fingers at the women and the traditional courts are even on this female genital mutilation. Mr. Speaker, we visited Wa area where this practice is dominant. We visited the Northern Region and we were told that they do not do it. We visited other places where they do not do it but for Wa area, yes, they do it.
Apart from the clitoris being “chopped”
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Order! Order! Hon. Member for Mion?
Dr. A. Y. Alhassan 12:40 p.m.
On a point of
order. Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member just said that she and her team went to Wa and the practice was predominant. I just wanted to know what ratio of people in Wa practise that.
Mrs. Baiden-Amissah 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
Dr. Alhassan 12:40 p.m.
On a point of order.
Mr. Speaker, I have a strong point of order. First of all, the hon. Deputy Minister said that the question of culture does not come in. I do not know what her definition of culture is. Certainly, those practices in those areas are part of their culture - [Interruption.] She said it when she started her contribution.
Secondly, she said that first of all, when the men are going in they do not look there but now she is saying that when they look there they look frightened. So I do not know what her position is and she has not told us what the ‘there' is and what the men want there. She has not told us.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Hon.
Deputy Minister, please go on.
Mrs. Baiden-Amissah 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
what I am saying is that this is an outmoded culture; it is an outmoded practice. And if you look at the permanent harm, the scar that is left there, which the scientists call cyst, at the entrance of the female organ, the reproductive organ, it is to such an extent that a woman cannot easily bear children unless she goes through a caesarean section.
Mr. Balado Manu 12:40 p.m.
On a point of
order. Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member seems to be misleading this House. To say that women are the people who suffer when the circumcision takes place, is misleading this House. If you are a man and you are having sex with such a lady, you also suffer a lot. [Laughter.] Because it takes time to be able to satisfy her and you need more energy. And so this is not a woman matter, it is man and woman matter. [Interruptions.]
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Order!
Order! Hon. Balado Manu, you are totally out of order.
Ms. Theresa Tagoe 12:40 p.m.
On a point of
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Hon.
Deputy Minister, I ruled him out of order and so his intervention is no more a subject of comment.
Ms. Tagoe 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on another point of order. Mr. Speaker, the first time we discussed this matter here, I had a call from a man. What he said was as follows: “You people, what is wrong with you? The thing is, when that thing is not there, you go on and on and on and so it is nice and we enjoy it more. And so what is the problem?” [Interruptions.]
Mr. Manu 12:40 p.m.
That is the energy we use,
going on and on and on, we need energy.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Hon.

Minister, please wind up.
Mrs. Baiden-Amissah 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, copulation between a man and a woman must be enjoyed by the two, it must be participatory. Some women enjoy clitoral orgasm and others, vaginal orgasm. If you chop off the clitoris which is the sensory organ which can cause a woman to copulate with a man, if that is destroyed and all those things are also destroyed, it is the woman who becomes disfigured for life - [Interruptions.]
Maj. (Dr.) (Alhaji) M. Ahmed (retd): On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, the hon. Deputy Minister has made a statement which is not true. She says that when women undergo mutilation, they are unable to bear children which is not correct. It is not in all the cases that they have that complication and I want her to take note of the fact.
Mrs. Baiden-Amissah 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, if the hon. Member who just spoke had listened to me well, he would have heard that I said some women even develop cyst and this blocks the entrance of the reproductive organ and so when such women are delivering babies, it becomes difficult for the head of the babies to come out and the women would have to go through caesarean section; and that is a risk. And so, if one destroys the sensory organ of the woman, it means it is only the man who enjoys copulation. And what have we done to the men? Why should the men let us suffer in this manner?
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Hon. Member, you are veering into the Second Reading of the Bill. We are on the amendment about the period of sentencing -- if you can just wind up on that.
Mrs.Baiden-Amissah 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
I am winding up but what I mean is that, even the knives for carrying out the operation are not washed; they are only wiped and so the woman can even suffer
from AIDS that could be transferred from an AIDS patient to her. And the fistula that develops there, when the woman is forcing to deliver, it can break and when it breaks, it goes through the anus and the whole thing opens like this -- [Uproar.] If it happens this way, the men just send them away because they cannot marry a woman whose place is as open as the hell gate.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Hon. Deputy Minister, what is your position on the amendment?
Mrs. Baiden-Amissah 12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
for the reasons that I have dilated on, I support the Committee's amendment of the punishment ranging from ten years to twenty-five years. I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for permitting me.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:40 p.m.
Order!
Order! I will take two final comments. Let us take the Member for Tamale North and then hon. Deputy Majority Leader, that will be your conclusion.
Alhaji Sumani Abukari 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am most grateful for this opportunity. Mr. Speaker, I am not going to take too long because I think I have expressed my opinion on the floor.
But Mr. Speaker, I want one thing to be understood clearly that those of us who are opposing the severe sentence are not -- and I repeat -- We are not in any way endorsing that outmoded practice. It is outmoded; it is unhealthy; and it is risky for the young lady; that, we all agree. So nobody should have the view that we are endorsing that practice. Nobody is endorsing that practice -- nobody. We are saying that the sentence, as recommended by the Committee, is too severe. We have heard the hon. Minister for Women and Children's Affairs talk about other
countries and what sentences those other countries place on women who practise these things.
Mr. Speaker, let me dare say that I
have at least one or two other people here who know what is going on there and who know that sometimes the women, educated women who are born down south here, go back home and demand that they be circumcised. Educated women go back home and demand that they be circumcised because if they are not circumcised they are not proper women.
Mrs. Agnes Chigabatia 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
the hon. Member is misleading the House -- [Interruption] -- Not now. Nowadays, you will not get it. The thing is really coming down but we are saying that if you insist on doing it then you go in for those years. But for my hon. Colleague to stand there and say even educated women go and demand to be circumcised -- What has it got to do -- It does not prevent anything so why does one have to go and demand that it should be done away with? Why? You can still be a woman without it. It is not true.
Alhaji Abukari 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am
happy that the hon. Member for Builsa North has confirmed that -- “not now”; that now it is not done. She has confirmed that it was done some time ago. The women insisted that it should be done to them. She has confirmed it.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, can
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Hon.
Member for Tamale North, go on.
Alhaji Abukari 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I will
just ignore that one. It is true that it is injurious to the health of the women who go through it. It is true that it affects their
Mr. Joe Baidoe-Ansah 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
the hon. Member is misleading this House. He is presenting this situation as if it were a situation restricted to illiterates. It is not a practice restricted to illiterates. This is because if he says that even educated people go there, it means the practice is restricted to some people but other people also take advantage of it. It is not a practice for illiterates. It is a practice by a group of people, whether illiterates or literates. And in this House we are saying that it is wrong and we have to do away with it.
Alhaji Abukari 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, he has
said nothing so far because I have not said that it is right. I have said it is wrong and we should all condemn it. And the fact that he has experienced it does not mean that I cannot talk about it.
Mr. Speaker, I do not think I need any
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the
hon. Member is misleading this House and he must be made to withdraw that. At the public hearing there was a nurse from Nadowli who came and recounted her experience. And her experience was that as a result of female genital mutilation -- [Interruptions] -- Yes, the practitioners -- And there was also a practitioner who advocated that they should even sentence them to death. And that some of them have resigned from committing or undertaking those practices.
So if he was not a member of the Committee that went there, he should not come here and say that the practitioners were not asked. Mr. Speaker, he must be made to withdraw the statement that the Committee did not take evidence from practitioners. In fact, the Committee took evidence from a number of practitioners.
rose
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Hon. Member for Okere, do you have any further point of order?
Mr. B. D. K. Adu 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it
seems we are splitting hairs. The hon. Member for Tamale North spoke of the past and not the present. And he is not saying that he agrees with the practice but he was making reference; so we should accept it that way and move on.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Hon.
Member for Tamale North, could you please wind up.
Alhaji Abukari 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is
unfortunate that I have been compelled to divulge this secret. Mr. Speaker, when that Committee went there, the hon. Chairman said a nurse -- This nurse was a victim; she was not a practitioner.
Secondly, when the Committee went
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Order!
Order!
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Order!
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Order! Order!
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am glad the hon. Minority Leader is in the House. And I am sure that he will get the opportunity to contribute to this debate.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Order! Order! Hon. Chairman, the issue raised by him is not to challenge your right to present that Report. That is not what he is saying. He is saying that you were not there --[Interruptions] -- Order! Order!
The main issue is whether the Committee interviewed a practitioner or not. It is as simple as that. So if they did, if you have credible report from the Committee that they did, then of course, that answers the point that he is raising.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 12:50 p.m.
But, Mr. Speaker, what is the reasonable inference to be drawn from the statement he made? The only reasonable inference from the statement he made is that what I am reporting as the hon. Chairman of the Committee is inferior -- [Interruptions]
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Hon. Chairman, you do not seem to get the point. Your right as the Chairman to present the Report is not being challenged. All that is important now is whether the allegation that the Committee never interviewed a practitioner is true or not. That is the only issue.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 12:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, that allegation is false and if he has any evidence, he must prove it on the floor of this House. I challenge him to prove that, otherwise he should be made to withdraw the statement.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 12:50 p.m.
Very well. Hon. Member for Tamale North, the hon. Chairman says that the Report shows that the Committee did talk to a practitioner and unless you have a proof that it is otherwise then obviously you have to withdraw that statement. This is because it is an indictment not only on the Chairman but on the Committee as a whole. So if you have a proof of it, the House would like to hear it.
Alhaji Abukari 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, this morning when I came in, I went in there and talked to hon. Ndebugre and I have since talked to other hon. Members of this House. The Ranking Member of the Committee who was there is here; there is another Member of the Committee sitting here to my left. It is true they talked to a wide range of people but they did not talk to any practitioners. They did not; they did not talk to any practitioners; they can confirm -- [Interruptions.]
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Order! Order! Hon. Member, you were referring to a Ranking Member; who is the Ranking Member?
Alhaji Abukari 1 p.m.
Hon. Agbesi.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Hon. Agbesi, comment on that. First of all hon. Agbesi, did you undertake the visit?
Mr. A. K. Agbesi 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I was there.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Very well, let us hear you.
Mr. Agbesi 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we talked to a lot of people excluding a practitioner -- [Interruption.]
rose
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Are you a member of the Committee and did you go along?
Mr. Puozaa 1 p.m.
No, Mr. Speaker, let me clarify an issue. I was present and I happen to be the Member of Parliament for Nadowli East. I was present when my hon. Colleagues arrived there and I did sit in as a friend of the Committee. To be fair to everybody, it was just a general contribution from the floor and the nurse got up to give her own testimony of what she had experienced. I was present and to be frank, the hon. Chairman of the Committee was not present -- [Interruption] -- But I did capture much of what they did on my camera which is available -- [Interruptions.]
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Order! Order! Hon. Members, order!
Mr. Puozaa 1 p.m.
So please, if only that visit was meant to gather information from the general public, I think what they are

saying is not really very clear.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Hon. Member, all the information we need from you is whether you are aware a practitioner was talked to or not.
Mr. Puozaa 1 p.m.
No, she was a member of the public and she is a nurse, a victim of the act. She is a victim.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Very well, let us hear from the hon. Member for Tamale Central.
Mr. I. A. B. Fuseini 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it is important to state that the Committee, when it embarked on the trip, was not to talk to practitioners and victims. It was to seek the opinion of opinion leaders in the various areas that were identified as practising the female genital mutilation and seek their views on the attempt to raise the sentence from four years to ten years. That was what the Committee did.
And in meeting the people, indeed, I can remember at Walewale some of the old women and men, especially the old women said yes, they used to practise it but they had stopped. Some of the men said -- [Interruption] -- But the meeting was not to talk to practitioners and victims. The meeting was to seek the views of the various communities on the enhancement of the sentence. Mr. Speaker, I think it would be grossly unfair to now limit the purpose of the meeting to speaking to practitioners and victims. That was not the initial intention of the meeting.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Hon. Member for Tamale North, your intervention did not say that it was limited to talking to practitioners. However, your intervention which zeroed in on not talking to practitioners, as if that detracted
substantially from the Committee's work is not the case, and if you pursue it that way it might give a misleading view that the Committee did not do a thorough work.
I think that based on what we have heard you may have to address that issue, the line that you were taking, and let us make progress.
Alhaji Abukari 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I just said it in passing and it was he who raised it and made it a heated debate -- [Interruption] -- He was not there. Do not let us repeat this over and over again; he was not there. He should not present it as if he was there.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Hon. Member, can you please go on.
Alhaji Abukari 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the debate now is on the sentence so I want to lay the foundation before I come to that.
Mr. Speaker, I have said it here, and I will repeat it again that if we want to stop any society or any group of people in this country from practising things that we now think are out of date and outmoded, the best thing is to go and educate them. The best thing to do is to go and convince them and explain to them why we think it is outmoded and why we think they should now come on board; that is what we should do. We cannot legislate that offence away. Mr. Speaker, we are making it very dangerous to try and legislate that offence away. And I talked about practitioners because if you go to the rural communities you would see that the practitioners are old, frail ladies who if you go and tell them not to practise it they would not understand why you are telling them not to practise it.
Mr. Yieleh Chireh 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In some communities, it is not only women who do it but men also do it; so the hon. Member should
not restrict the thing to only women practitioners.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Hon. Member for Tamale North, the point of order is that it is not only frail old ladies who practise it but even men.
Alhaji Abukari 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, unfortunately I thought the hon. Member was my very good friend, but from now on he is not my friend; because I do realize that he is also a practitioner -- [Inter- ruption.]
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Hon. Member for Tamale North, avoid unneccesaries; go to the main issues.
Alhaji Abukari 1 p.m.
Anybody who practises that thing can never be my friend; he is no more my friend. Mr. Speaker, on a more serious note -- [Interruption.]
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 1 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, what the hon. Member from Tamale North is saying is that these women are old and frail and therefore if you sentence them to ten years to twenty-five years then you are giving them a death sentence. I equally want to point out to him that where a child is mutilated then one is committing that child also to a death sentence. So we must balance the young and the old at the same time and see whether we want to preserve the life of the child or the life of the frail old woman that he is telling us to do.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Hon. Chairman, what you are doing is just an argument to support your case; that is not a point of order. Let us make progress.
rose
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1 p.m.
Hon. Member, you raised a point of order, do
you have another point of order?
Mr. Chireh 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, my former hon. Friend has made a very terrible allegation against me because I had a different view from his; and I do not think it is fair. If I were a practitioner I would not be going for the harsher punishment; I would be supporting the lesser. He should withdraw that part of the statement and I wish to say I do not want that. [Interruptions.]
Alhaji Abukari 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, it looks like he is still courting my friendship so I have withdrawn that one. [Laughter.]
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Can you please wind up?
Alhaji Abukari 1:10 p.m.
Yes, Mr. Speaker. So Mr. Speaker, I am not saying that we should free the old ladies and condemn the children to death. Most of the people, more than 98 per cent of the people who are circumcised do not die in the process. It is true that they have some mutilation that may affect them, but Mr. Speaker, I can say as a fact that there are some ladies who are mutilated but who enjoy sex better than the hon. Deputy Minister; I can say that as a fact.
Mr. Speaker, secondly, I would suggest

So Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that we reduce the sentence to a minimum of one year and a maximum of five years. With that I am done, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Kofi Jumah 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member is misleading this House. In the first place how does he know that ladies
Mr. Kofi Jumah 1:10 p.m.


who are mutilated enjoy sex better than the hon. Deputy Minister? He should not make those kinds of allegations here.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
Hon. Member, I am sure you have landed?
Alhaji Abukari 1:10 p.m.
But Mr. Speaker, he made an allegation. In fact, I am surprised at the attitude of the Chairman because yesterday we sat at that corner -- the Chairman, the Deputy Majority Leader, hon. Haruna Iddrisu and myself. We sat at the back there and we agreed that the minimum sentence should come down to four years and the maximum to -- we have agreed on it. The Deputy Majority Leader is here -- he is going to talk, and I am sure he would raise it.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
It is not for you to determine that. [Interruptions.]
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I will be very brief. Mr. Speaker, I support all those who have argued against the 25 year sentence; I think it is unreasonable. The last time I made a point, and I think it is important that I repeat it so that the House would know what we want to do.
Mr. Speaker, when you want to sentence for an offence, the mode of trial is important. Mr. Speaker, the Bill talks about conviction following summary trial. Summary trial, for those of us who are not lawyers is not -- [Interruption] -- We cannot also have trial indictment which is better and which affords the accused person better ways of defence.
So for all sorts of offences which carry
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, with the greatest respect to the hon. Member, if the hon. Member looks at the provisions of Section 101 of the Criminal Code, in defilement it is summary conviction but it ranges between seven years and 25 years. So for him to say that because this is a summary offence and therefore it is not an indictable offence, one cannot go the whole log of 25 years, I do not think we can do that.
With respect to the hon. Member, it is incorrect when you take into account what Section 101(2) states in the Criminal Code.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
have an answer to that question. I was here when that Statement was made; we have exceptions.
Mr. Speaker, the norm is not to give duration of sentence flowing from trial by summary procedure; that is an exception and I know about it. I know about armed robbery; I know that we made an amendment that made armed robbery summary trial; I know about that. But Mr. Speaker, these are exceptional cases. And as I said earlier, the intention of the offender is important.
These are people who have a practice, and I understand people die from this
practice, but the intention is not to commit murder or manslaughter; that is not the intention. So if we agree, as we do, that this practice is bad, the answer, as has been well articulated, is not to give 25 years.
Mr. Chireh 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, what the hon. Deputy Majority Leader is seeking to do is to say that this crime which we are now going to condemn as a practice -- or we have already done so but now trying to enhance the sentence -- does not have the element of intention. It is there. The thing is that the person involved must know what he is doing and the consequences of his action.
So the intention is there because he must know that he is going to do this to somebody and he would hurt the person; and so this is not the kind of crime that he is talking about. He is misleading us and he should advert his mind to the fact that once we are enacting a law, what it is representing is that the person must know that his intention to do what he is doing is contrary to the law.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, just
for his benefit. I used to be a very good criminal law student and criminal law practitioner. Mr. Speaker, the intention that I am talking about, the hon. Member does not get me right. The intention is not measuring the effect of the act. The Criminal Code 113 has defined intention, and I know that, but I am talking about the intention of the offender.
The intention of the practitioner is not to inflict harm or cause murder or manslaughter; that is not it. And so the intention I am talking about is that the offender does not intend the effect of the act; he does not intend to commit murder
rose
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:10 p.m.
I think there is a legal argument here, let us hear the hon. Member on his feet's knowledge of the law.
Mr. Mahama Ayariga 1:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity. Mr. Speaker, on the issue of intention, I think there is something that as a House we are missing when it comes to the issue of female genital mutilation. The intention of a criminal when he goes to commit murder, manslaughter, or rape is different from the intention of an old woman or even a parent or a family member when she takes a child and sends that child for her genital organ to be mutilated.
Why do I say so, Mr. Speaker? This is an intention which is being induced by a cultural practice, the person has been socialized into thinking that that is the right thing to do. Mr. Speaker, that is why when we are legislating and punishing people for their conduct, we should consider with what motive, with what intention are they approaching the two different contacts. We all agree that it is bad, that we want to outlaw it, that we have even punished people who have carried out the conduct.
Now, we want to enhance the punishment and we are saying that let us not have an exceedingly primitive punishment because this is an intention that is different from the intention of a robber. This is the difference between this intention and the other intention.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am making my point. Looking at the
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:20 p.m.


circumstances, I am compelled to support my hon. Friend from Tamale South, Mr. Iddrisu, and support the proposal that hon. Iddrisu's amendment be further amended to read: “not less than one year and not more than five years”. I support his proposal.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the law as it stands now -- and I think the hon. Deputy Majority Leader did not get this point. The Bill seeks to impose a sentence of four years upwards. The amendment proposed is to bring it from the four that the Bill seeks to impose to 10 years and then a maximum of 25 years. So for him to say that it is three years is factually incorrect.
Secondly, he must understand that if the Committee had not proposed the amendment it would have been four, infinitum, but now what we are doing is to cap it. Now, if he wants to propose a counter-amendment, then Mr. Speaker, he should say so.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
I think your position has been made clear.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, my hon. Colleague is new and so I would excuse his language. But he must know that this House is not bound by any proposal in this Bill; he must know that much.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:20 p.m.
Hon.
Member for Nhyiaeso, knowing your professional background, just limit yourself to the sentencing.
Dr. Richard W. Anane 1:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I do respect your caution to me. But Mr. Speaker, I think that if we are looking at the law which is being taken from our Constitution and which law borders on tradition, I would wish that we look at it
a little more carefully.
Mr. Speaker, female genital mutilation definitely impacts on the lives of the women who have to go through that practice. It also impacts on the lives of babies who would be born by these women and I definitely have had a lot of experience repairing the injuries caused because of this practice.
But Mr. Speaker, that is not to say because of the time and the energies that we have had to spend repairing the damages caused to the genital parts of these women we would have to enact a law that is going to put people in prison for well up to 25 years.
Mr. Speaker, we are criminalising a traditional practice, but we must also appreciate that it is a traditional practice; it is not a wilful cause. The person who was practising it did not wilfully decide that, “I am going to cause injury and pain to somebody”. They had seen it over the years as a practice, tradition, and that is why they were doing it. The framers of our Constitution in their wisdom saw the need to outlaw this practice. We as legislators have now been given the opportunity to come out with a law, a reasonable law, that would make it unattractive to practise female genital mutilation.
Mr. Speaker, because of the genesis, where the thing is coming from, we do not have to look at it without maybe tampering it with a little knowledge of custom. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, in spite of the fact that yes, I have noticed the impact of the practice on women, on babies who are to be born through these genital paths, the injuries on the women, especially making life so difficult for them -- In fact, their social life tends to be shattered. Fortunately now, doctors in this country have the capacity to repair some of the injuries done to these women.

In spite of these, Mr. Speaker, I would plead with the House to look at this law not from the point of view of punishment but from the point of view of disincentive. We are trying to “disincentivise” the practice of some culture and because we are trying to that we must look at it more carefully. Mr. Speaker, I would rather go for a sentence of a minimum of three years and a maximum of five years -- no more.

Even then, Mr. Speaker, I still think it is a bit too harsh because we need to educate the people. The practice can go down even with education. If you look at the education of our people, if you look at the practice in the educated sections of the area where this custom is practised you would find that it is gradually going down.

So the first thing is to encourage education. If we educate them, this would come down. But then because we do not want it to be practised we put a law in place and let it be known that if you do this practice you are liable to go to prison; and if a person is to go to prison even for three years he would not be happy going to prison by practising this.
Mr. A. S. K. Bagbin 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker,
definitely the House is faced with a very difficult decision and we are trying to be guided by our experience both as legislators and as citizens of this country. Mr. Speaker, I believe strongly that there is a rethinking of the laws surrounding
sexual offences and some customary practices that are injurious to human life. I believe that that is part of liberation of our women and gender equality.
Mr. Speaker, the change from “female circumcision” to “female genital mutilation” gives a message. Female circumcision, as we all know, was criminalized recently. But definitely circumcision is not a crime; if it were, the men would have also been up in arms. So they decided to go to “genital mutilation” and the term itself conveys strong feelings -- mutilation -- which means that a lot of harm is being caused to the victims.
Mr. Speaker, I believe it is from this background that there is the need to enhance the sentence in order to deter the practitioners. But we are faced with the issue of education and enforcement because if the people are not educated and you enhance to deter, the crime will only go underground and you are unlikely to get people to be reporting even after the victims have suffered it themselves. So we need to make a delicate balance between the two positions. And Mr. Speaker, since the current crime of female circumcision carries the minimum sentence of three years the proposal is to take it to four years.
Some hon. Members feel that it should go beyond four years; some are saying five years and some are saying ten years. The proposal is not giving us a maximum, but people are minded to at least assist the judges to come up with a maximum -- not to go beyond some limit.
I am tempted, Mr. Speaker, to look at this offence along the same lines as defilement. How do we see defilement? How do we see genital mutilation? We in this House decided that the minimum sentence for defilement should be seven

years; that is the minimum sentence. Now, which one is hasher? Seven years to 25 years, which one in our own estimation is a more outrageous offence? Which one do we feel should receive a more deterrent sentence? Some people think that it should be defilement.

Mr. Speaker, even if we take the position that defilement is a more heinous crime than female genital mutilation, definitely, the differences in sentencing should not be that wide; so Mr. Speaker, I am tempted to go with those who are proposing the minimum of five. I think that it is an improvement on the proposal from the Bill, which is talking about four as minimum.

I am tempted to agree with the minimum of five years, and then we leave the rest to the discretion of the judges. The judges could go -- depending on the circumstances of the case -- [Inter- ruption] -- The minimum of five years is acceptable, but the maximum of twenty- five years, for me, is not acceptable. I think that we should go according to the sense of the Bill, by enhancing the -- [Interruption.]
Dr. Anane 1:30 p.m.
On a point of order. Mr.
Speaker, I am sorry, I have to interrupt the hon. Minority Leader. Mr. Speaker, comparing defilement to female genital mutilation (FGM) should not be accepted. Defilement is an abnormal act; FGM, is a customary practice. If you go to a society, what is a practice is a norm. Mr. Speaker, if we are now outlawing it, we do not compare it to what is not acceptable to all of us.
So Mr. Speaker, before we even make
anything out of it, we should not compare these two in order for us to be looking at the extremes of sentencing. Do not let us be arbitrary.
Mr. Bagbin 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am not
comparing defilement to female genital mutilation. I am trying to let us see a sense of disapproval. We definitely disapprove of both, but which one do you have stronger feelings against? Because that is what would assist us in looking at the sentencing. That is what I am saying; I am not comparing the two offences.
Mr. Speaker, I am being told that, definitely, we have stronger feelings against defilement, and that is why defilement should get a higher minimum than the FGM. And that is why I have not taken the seven but I am saying five, which is in consonance with the thinking of the House.
Mr. Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:30 p.m.
Mr.
Speaker, I believe the hon. Minority Leader is misleading this House. The hon. Minority Leader -- is a very matured person, and he knows the difference between defilement and FGM. Mr. Speaker, he knows this -- the difference is crystal clear to him. He stands in the House, and he is saying that he has only thrown this matter up and he is now being told that there should be stronger disapproval for FGM.
Mr. Speaker, I believe he knows better. He says that he is being told that there should be stronger feeling of disapproval over defilement. Mr. Speaker, he knows; he is not being told now. He knows, and with respect to him, he cannot pretend that he does not know; for that reason, I believe he has been misleading this House.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Hon. Minority Leader, please go on. He says you are misleading the House; that he knows in your heart that you know --
Mr. Bagbin 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I was just
trying, not to impose my knowledge on the House. I wanted to get the sense of the House, that is why I threw it open; and the reaction from hon. Members, then directed me that my thinking is the right thinking. That is why I referred to it. I am not misleading the House. Mr. Speaker, I would want to urge the House to look at the issue of deterrence with a human face. I believe that slapping higher sentences would not produce a solution to the problem.
We all agree that education, education, and education is the solution. But whilst we get through the education, there should also be some sense of criminality, and that is why the sentencing. And I think that the sentence should not be below five years; five should be sufficient to hold people or prevent people from engaging in a cultural practice that we all disapprove of. It is really an abomination, and we should all support it and make sure that we eliminate it; but I do not agree with the maximum.
rose
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
I have a rather untidy situation; I have two clear amendments that are here. And in contribution, hon. Members have mentioned other periods of incarceration, and that makes the picture rather untidy. Perhaps, the way to go about it is to put the Question on the counter-amendment and see its fate; and then the others would be so determined.
So what we have now on the Order Paper, are the amendment proposed by the Chairman, and then the counter amendment by the hon. Haruna Iddrisu -- [Interruption ] -- yes, I am aware that you did make a proposal. I am saying that it is
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.


not you alone who has made one. Even the Deputy Majority Leader, then Minister for Women and Children's Affairs and so on. So if we want to go about it, one by one, we are going to get into a messy ground. So I am putting the amendment proposed by the hon. Haruna Iddrisu.

Question put and amendment agreed to, viz:

Clause 1, subclause (1), at end delete “four years” and substitute “five years and not more than ten years”.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
The amendment is carried, so all the others fall. The Criminal Code (Amendment) -- [Interruption.]
There is a second amendment. There is
a second amendment that is item (iii) by the Chairman.
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, in view of the will of the hon. Members of this House, the second amendment should follow as a matter of course.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Consequential?
Mr. Osei-Ameyaw 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, yes, consequential.
Some hon. Members -- rose --
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Very well. That should be it. The Long Title --
Mr. E. K. D. Adjaho 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I did not get the hon. Chairman of the Committee very well with regard to the other amendments standing in his name -- [Interruption] -- It must be moved and the Question put. Mr. Speaker, I think it must be moved; then you put the final
Question on the clause; and then we move to the Long Title.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:30 p.m.
Once the counter-amendment has been carried; it is consequential. So the Long Title --
Clause 1 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
The Long Title ordered to stand part of the Bill.
HALF-HOUR MOTION 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
I did not disrupt proceedings in order to take the half-hour motion because of some understanding that was reached. Deputy Minority Leader, since you were there at the meeting, can you say something about the half-hour motion -- item (9)?
Mr. Adjaho 1:40 p.m.
I thought you were going to summarize the position and then I can support you in the absence of the Majority Leader who was there.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
It is not for me to summarize the position. The Deputy Majority Leader was not there, but you were there.
Mr. Adjaho 1:40 p.m.
Well, Mr. Speaker, I think the understanding was that since the Majority side said we cannot take this debate for more than 30 minutes and we on our part see this debate as a national issue and want to get as many hon. Members of the House as possible involved in the debate which will naturally go beyond the 30 minutes, a compromise has been reached by the Leaders of both sides of the House that this be pushed to early part of next week and into a full-blown debate.
The current motion is therefore to be transformed into a Private Member's Motion for a full-blown debate rather than the Half-Hour Motion under Order 49 of the Standing Orders.
In view of that, this motion will come on some time next week, either Tuesday or Wednesday. We are yet to get the confirmation from the Majority Leader who said he was going to consult and tell us the exact day, either Tuesday or Wednesday. Therefore, this motion will be taken next week as a Private Member's Motion, which will be a full-blown debate on the energy crisis.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I was not at the meeting, but I have been told that there has been some understanding. I am happy that my hon. Colleague says there will be a transformation of the motion. As we are all aware, this motion was brought under Order 49 which permits no amendment. It is still a Private Member's Motion, but we can amend it. If the intent now is to bring another motion under Order 79 or 83 which can be amended, we will accept that.
But Mr. Speaker, they must also know that you do not just transform the motion and have it argued, say, on Tuesday. You must give some amount of notice. So it is important that we understand the rules that if they take off this motion and make another motion, it is subject to amendment. I must make that clear, because we intend to amend any motion under any other Order.
Mr. Adjaho 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am a bit surprised. That was the reason why I did not want to speak, when you called me, I was a bit reluctant. When people are not present when decisions are taken and they are informed, it creates a problem. If I had known that this would be the reaction we would have gone ahead to move this motion today under Order 49 and that
Mr. Adjaho 1:40 p.m.


would not have prevented us from coming under the substantive motion.

But we see it as a waste of time because the same matter on the same question might virtually be put. This was a suggestion that came and we thought that it would be of interest to the House to get more Members to participate in this matter.

I am not saying that it cannot be amended; I have never said that. But what I am saying is that this motion will be treated as a Private Member's Motion and no longer under Order 49. Therefore, all the rules subsequently apply. That is what I am saying.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:40 p.m.
I do not see why what I said cannot be accepted. Mr. Speaker, if a new motion comes under Order 78 or 79, that motion is not under Order 49 and it can be amended. I am serving notice that if they proceed under that Order, we will amend the motion.
Mr. Adjaho 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I do not see his point.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
This is not the way it should go; please, resume your seat. The understanding was clearly that because this matter is of national interest, the sentiments of Parliament should be expressed and there was the feeling that we might have to bend the rules in respect to 30 minutes and of course, that was not going to be easy. So the agreement was that they would bring in a motion which would attract full debate and I did point out that the appropriate notice should be given so that that motion can be taken.
There was a view that it could be brought as an urgent motion and I said of
course, it has not come yet, they should let it come in whatever form and then the appropriate directives would be given. The Majority Leader then said, since it was necessary for the hon. Minister for Energy to be in to assist the House, he needed to ask him in order for the Business Committee to determine whether it would be Tuesday or Wednesday.
So that was the agreement which was reached in my presence by the Majority and Minority Leaders as well as the Deputy Minority Leader. So it is something you can take up and get the stage set so that if the motion comes then we can have a debate. That is exactly what happened.
Mr. Adjaho 1:40 p.m.
I am getting a bit
surprised on this matter. Do I understand that the new understanding is that a new motion should be brought altogether? I thought I was very clear in my mind when I was leaving Mr. Speaker's Lobby this morning that it is this same matter that would be treated as a motion but no longer as a half-hour motion. Therefore, it will not be limited to the 30 minutes debate.
It was on that basis some of us agreed to the proposal. But if it is now coming out that I will have to file a new motion that will have to pass through all the procedures, then I want to say without consulting the Minority Leader that the half-hour motion should stay. We can look for the persons in whose name the motion stands for them to move the motion. Those things were not part of the understanding that we arrived at in Mr. Speaker's Lobby today.
We thought that since we are masters of our own procedures, so long as it is not against any law to transform that motion into a Private Member's Motion it could be heard on Tuesday or Wednesday. In fact, the only reason that the Majority Leader did not give us a definite date but mentioned Tuesday and Wednesday was
Mr. Adjaho 1:40 p.m.


because he said he wanted to talk to the hon. Minister for Energy to be present to take part in the debate.

If today some of the movers of the motion are not here, when do we get them to file the motion and when will it mature for another debate? That is the point I am making, that that was not my under-standing yesterday and I want to put it on record.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
I do not think there is need to drag this because there was need to announce a motion not under the half-hour motion rule and the need for notice that -- if you were still there -- the Minority Leader said it could come as an urgent motion. There was reason for him to say that just because of the need for notice so we did not go with any confused state of things. So that is it; the Leadership can tidy this up.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we do not intend to bend the rules in this matter. If they come by an ordinary motion, I have told him and he must accept it, it would be subject to notice and liable to amendment; that was all I said.
Mr. Second Deputy Speaker 1:40 p.m.
That is all for this now. We have come to item 10. Deputy Majority Leader.
Mr. A. O. Aidooh 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I
beg to move that we adjourn proceedings till Tuesday next at 10. o'clock in the forenoon.
Mr. E. T. Mensah 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I beg to second the motion.
Question put and motion agreed to.
ADJOURNMENT 1:40 p.m.
  • The House was accordingly adjourned at 1.50 p.m. till 12th June, 2007 at 10.00 a.m.