Debates of 5 Jul 2010

MADAM SPEAKER
PRAYERS 11:05 a.m.

VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 11:05 a.m.

Madam Speaker 11:05 a.m.
Hon Members, Correction of Votes and Proceedings of Friday, 2nd July, 2010.

Hon Members, in the absence of any corrections, the Votes and Proceedings of Friday, 2nd July, 2010 is adopted as the true record of proceedings.

Hon Members, in the absence of any corrections, the Official Report of Friday, 25th June, 2010 is hereby adopted as the true record of proceedings.

We move now to Questions. Hon Minister for Defence?

The first Question is in the name of Hon Benito Owusu-Bio.
ORAL ANSWERS TO 11:05 a.m.

QUESTIONS 11:05 a.m.

MINISTRY OF DEFENCE 11:05 a.m.

Minister for Defence (Lt. Gen. J. H. Smith (retd) 11:05 a.m.
Madam Speaker, on 25th June, 1967, the then Commissioner responsible for the Lands Department gave approval for the acquisition of the military land at Nkaakom in Atwima Nwabiagya District.
According to a Notice of Occupation and Use of Land, dated 28th April, 1975, the Government intimated its intention to acquire that track of land for the purposes of constructing barracks for an Infantry Battalion. A Certificate of Allocation was subsequently issued with LS No. 36/75 and 58/88 on 25th January 1988. However, no Executive Instrument (E.I.), which is crucial in formalising the acquisition process was passed.
Madam Speaker, a search conducted at the Lands Registry by the headquarters of the Northern Command of the Ghana Armed Forces on 17 th May, 2010 confirmed the details as provided in the said Certificate of Allocation. The land covers an approximate area of 828.59 acres and is situated at south of Afari near mile post 12, on the road from Nkawie to Kumasi in the Kumasi West District of the Ashanti Region, and lays north of Nkaakom.
Furthermore, this parcel of land cuts across the fringes of Nkaakom village. Since the land in dispute is referred to as “AFARI LANDS”, the occupants of Nkaakom stool have held an erroneous view that it does not include the sections within the Nkaakom village.
Madam Speaker, in April 2002, a legal firm, Hesse and Larsey, wrote several letters to the Ghana Armed Forces
asserting that the above-mentioned land was the property of their client, the Toase Stool of Kumasi. This Ministry conveyed in writing its ownership of the said lands to the petitioners. However, not satisfied with the state of affairs, the Toase-Nkaakom Stool in May, 2004, filed a writ at the Kumasi High Court seeking a declaration of title and recovery of the possession of 475.44 acres out of the total acreage of 828.59.
Madam Speaker, hearing of the suit is yet to commence by the High Court. The last time the matter came up for mention was on the 19th May, 2010, at which time the Judge instructed the plaintiffs to confirm certain issues at the Lands Registry and report back to the court. The matter is being handled jointly by the Attorney- General's Office in Kumasi and the Legal Directorate of the General Headquarters, Ghana Armed Forces (GHQ).
Madam Speaker, investigations conducted from the Attorney-General's Department, Kumasi, confirmed the fact that an E.I. in respect of said lands was yet to be passed. The Ministry of Defence communicated the need for the passage of the E.I. to the Hon Attorney- General and Minister for Justice for urgent attention.
Madam Speaker, it is worthy to state that there has been significant encroachment on the lands for various uses, including farms and construction of permanent structures. The extent of the encroachment is yet to be ascertained.
Madam Speaker, in the light of the above, compensation cannot be paid until the following processes have been completed:
a) the lands re-surveyed to delineate the unencroached portions;
b) legal ownership established by the court as per the case under reference;
c) acquisition process completed through the issuance of the E.I.; and
d) the valuation of the confirmed size of land carried out.
Mr Owusu-Bio 11:15 a.m.
Madam Speaker,

Lt. Gen. Smith (retd): Madam Speaker, we have written to the Attorney- General's Department for the process to be completed for us to get the E.I. The issue concerning soldiers brutalizing the villagers has not come to my notice. But I want to assure you, this will be checked and we would make sure that it does not happen, if it does at all.
Mr Owusu-Bio 11:15 a.m.
Madam Speaker, since there is no E.I. in place, would the Hon Minister admit that the continuous occupation of the said land by the Ghana Armed Forces is illegal since 1967 till now [Interruptions.]
Madam Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Order! Order! Are you asking for his opinion?
Lt. Gen. Smith (retd): Thank you, Madam Speaker -
Madam Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Hon Minister, hold on - Hon Minister, hold on. You are really asking for his opinion even though the case is still pending.
Mr Owusu-Bio 11:15 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I will rephrase it. Madam Speaker, I will put the question again in another light --
Madam Speaker 11:15 a.m.
I do not even know whether since the case is pending we can meddle with it. But you wanted facts and he gave you them. Ask facts which would not amount to meddling in a case in court. This is because the case is in court right now and any suggestion you made, he took it. So let us watch these two issues. You cannot ask for his opinion, and we should not meddle with the case so that it will amount to interfering, otherwise, carry on.
Mr Owusu-Bio 11:15 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I have taken notice of your advice.
Madam Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Yes, before your third question comes.
Mr Owusu-Bio 11:15 a.m.
Madam Speaker, my second question because the other one was not granted, so --
Madam Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Have you not finished with your second question?
Mr Owusu-Bio 11:15 a.m.
Madam Speaker, the other one was not granted.
Madam Speaker 11:15 a.m.
All right, second question then.
Mr Owusu-Bio 11:15 a.m.
Madam Speaker, in what capacity is the Ministry or the Ghana Armed Forces trying to acquire the land? In what capacity are they occupying the land?
Madam Speaker 11:15 a.m.
In what capacity? Well, Hon Minister, can you answer the question?
Lt. Gen. Smith (retd): Madam Speaker, the Ghana Armed Forces as an institution, has a strategic plan and when the strategic plan demands that we should expand the Ghana Armed Forces
by way of acquiring lands for relocation of units and so on, it is proper that we go to Government with this decision and Government then works on it. If Government feels that it is proper in the scheme of things, to allow us to expand, then they will give us the go ahead to process the necessary documents to acquire a piece of land for future use of the institution. That is how we came by acquiring that piece of land in the area in question.
Madam Speaker 11:15 a.m.
Third question, if any.
Mr Owusu-Bio 11:15 a.m.
Madam Speaker, in the Hon Minister's Answer, he said the people of Nkaakom had erroneously thought that even the village was not part of the so-called acquisition because currently there is no acquisition. Madam Speaker, I want to find out from him, can you acquire somebody's village or somebody's hometown? Is it possible to acquire somebody's hometown or village since 1967? [Interruptions.]
Mr Avoka 11:25 a.m.
Madam Speaker, it is an opinion.
Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Yes, that is your third question.
Lt Gen. Smith (retd): Madam Speaker, I think this issue has been addressed early on. The case is before court and the outcome of the court will determine the question, that the Hon Member has asked, at the end of which others will follow.
Mr Joseph Osei-Owusu 11:25 a.m.
Madam Speaker, from the Hon Minister' answers, it is obvious that for the past 40 years, the Ministry of Defence has had the opportunity but had not used it. But now, the people of that community have asked for their land. Is it fair to continue to hope
or strategise into the people's community when they have expressed the desire to use it for themselves?
Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
That is a matter of opinion which you cannot ask him. If you have another question - this is his opinion. So, have you got another question or -
rose
Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Hon Balado, we have not seen you for some time. The floor is yours.
Mr Manu 11:25 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I was on a national assignment, that is why I was out of the country.
Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
I know.
Mr Manu 11:25 a.m.
Thank you.
Madam Speaker, my question to the Hon Minister is, in case - [Interruptions] - in case the litigation is won by the people who are contesting him, would the Ministry consider siting the barracks in an adjoining constituency or district? [Interruptions.]
Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
No. “In case” - No, he cannot answer the question. It is against the rules.
Mr Kwabena Appiah-Pinkrah - rose
- 11:25 a.m.

Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Yes, Hon Member, do you have any question before we come to the Hon Minority Leader?
Mr Appiah-Pinkrah 11:25 a.m.
Yes, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker, the Hon Minister claims in the Answer that the land needs to be re-surveyed to delineate the unencroached portions -
rose
Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Your question was a hypothetical one. So, I did not allow it.
Mr Appiah-Pinkrah 11:25 a.m.
And also the valuation of the confirmed size of land -
Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
No, no, start again.
Mr Appiah-Pinkrah 11:25 a.m.
All right Madam Speaker, thank you for the opportunity once more.
The Hon Minister, in the last portion of his Answer, claims that compensation cannot be paid until the following processes have been completed. And I am concerned about two of the four points that he raised.
The first point that he made was that, compensation can only be paid if the lands are re-surveyed to delineate the unencroached portions.
The second question that I am tackling is the (d) portion - the last issue that he raised; the valuation of the confirmed size of land carried out.
My question is,
(a) has the re-surveying been initiated and if not, when is the re-surveying going to be initiated?
(b) -- [Interruptions.] Excuse me. Has the valuation of the confirmed land been carried out, or attempts have been made to carry out the valuation of the confirmed size?
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Did you get the
question?
Lt. Gen. Smith (retd): Madam Speaker, I think it is proper we know
[LT. GEN. SMITH (RETD]the exact size of land that has not been encroached on before anything else can be done. And as I said, the case is in court. Once court determines all these issues, then we can go ahead and do the valuation and so on and so forth, so that the unencroached portion, compensation can be paid as per instructions from the court.
Alhaji Sumani Abukari 11:25 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I want your guidance on this matter. We have been told by the Hon Minister that this land dispute is now before the High Court in Kumasi. On page 14 of the Order Paper, that the land dispute is in the High Court in Kumasi since May, 2004. I am wondering whether we should be discussing it the way we are doing it here. Is it not sub judice?
Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Well, I have been watching the questions. Some of them are pure facts which I thought he could give. But if we are going to use the whole blanket to cover that Question, then we will not ask questions at all. But any question which I think goes into the final decision, I would disallow. As for questions for pure facts, I have allowed them.
But thank you, I would watch the questions.
Mr J. B. Aidoo 11:25 a.m.
Madam Speaker, the Nkaakom example that we are hearing this morning is just but one of the many cases where Executive Instruments have not been issued on Ghana Armed Forces lands. Madam Speaker, we have the Takoradi Air Force Station land, the Apramedu lands and all these Ghana Armed Forces lands are without Executive Instruments for which reason the Ghana Armed Forces are, by moral right, occupying these lands.
Madam Speaker, the question is what is the Ministry doing to ensure that they acquire legal rights over all these pieces of land across the country belonging to the Ghana Armed Forces?
Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
You mean the lands you have named?
Mr J. B. Aidoo 11:25 a.m.
Madam Speaker, it is not just the Nkaakom one. But across the whole country, some of the lands that they acquired dating back to the 1940s, they have not acquired any legal right to them. They are only occupying them by moral right. And my question is, what is the Ghana Armed Forces doing to establish legal rights over all these pieces of land across the country?
rose
Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Yes, Hon Member, were you raising an objection to the question?
Alhaji Abukari 11:25 a.m.
Madam Speaker, I was about to say that I thought this was a different Question altogether.
Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
You thought it was a different question?
Alhaji Abukari 11:25 a.m.
Yes, a different question all together and he can come by a substantive Question.
Madam Speaker 11:25 a.m.
Well, if he could
help us, if he could tell us facts, let us hear from him. If he needs to come back to answer some Questions, then he would say so.
The question is that some of the lands that the Ministry has occupied have no E.I.s, and what are you doing about them? Can you answer it because I think it falls within your purview?
Lt. Gen. Smith (retd): Madam Speaker, a team has been put in place and they have prepared a policy document on all Ghana Armed Forces lands. A strategic plan has also been prepared.
Madam Speaker, we are even thinking of forming a foundation to manage these lands. These documents have been presented to the Armed Forces Council just last month during the Council's meeting. The Council has accepted the

proposals that we put before them and has directed that we should liaise with the Attorney-General's Department to make sure that the contents of the documents are appropriate before we submit them to Cabinet for discussion and decision on them. So this is what we are doing with all our lands.
Mr Charles S. Hodogbey 11:35 a.m.
Madam Speaker, in the Hon Minister's Answer, he said a legal firm called Hesse and Larsey wrote several letters to the Ghana Armed Forces. Then his Ministry conveyed in writing its ownership of the said lands to the petitioners. I would like to know from him, in land law, how is ownership established? [Laughter.]
Madam Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Hon Hodogbey, is he a lawyer -- [Laughter] - to tell you how? This is for the court and that is why the case is in court. This is why the case is in court and if he should even attempt to do it, he would be interfering with the case. This is because if he tells you any decision which is contrary to the court's decision -- So I would not allow the question.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:35 a.m.
Madam Speaker, the parcels of land are acquired for use by the Ghana Armed Forces. In the second paragraph of the Hon Minister's Answer, he refers to sections within the Nkaakom village which have been acquired or which are being acquired. Madam Speaker, I want to know from him, is it a practice in the acquisition of lands for use by the Ghana Armed Forces? Is it a practice that settlements, that is, villages are acquired?
Lt. Gen. Smith (retd.): Madam
Speaker, I think before the Ghana Armed Forces takes any steps to acquire a piece
of land, we make sure that there are no settlements on the land. At the time we started the process to acquire the piece of land, there were no settlements in the area. As I said in my statement, there have been encroachers; so there has been encroachment since we started the process to acquire the piece of land.
rose
Madam Speaker 11:35 a.m.
He had asked the question for you. Is it the same question? Let him finish then.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:35 a.m.
Madam Speaker, the Hon Minister has spoken about encroachment, but that is not the point I am making. The second paragraph, he speaks about sections within the village that have been acquired. That is the settlement itself; portions of the settlement have been acquired and that is my worry.
Madam Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Yes, the last line, paragraph 2, he needs a further explanation. [Pause.] Yes, Hon Minister?
Lt. Gen. Smith (retd): Madam Speaker, with this, I would have to check and come back on it. But I believe he is talking about the fringes of the village. So I would take it that they have not acquired portions of the village itself; he is talking about fringes of the village.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:35 a.m.
Madam Speaker, clearly, if that was what was intended, that is not what has been captured in the Answer. The Answer provides that sections of the village, that
Madam Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Is it not another legal question, which the court would decide? [Laughter.]
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 11:35 a.m.
Madam Speaker, it ensues from his own Answer.
Madam Speaker 11:35 a.m.
I know but it is bordering on a legal matter which is before the court.
Yes, last question. Let me get the question first.
Mr Owusu-Bio 11:35 a.m.
Madam Speaker, in one of the answers given by the Hon Minister, he made reference to the fact that the village, in 1967, there was no village there. Madam Speaker, that is -
Madam Speaker 11:35 a.m.
You see why when you asked opinions and things. He was not there in 1967. So the answer he gave was, he did not know; he said, maybe, there was no village there but they do not
acquire villages.
Mr Owusu-Bio 11:35 a.m.
There was a village; the village has been there for over 200 years.
Madam Speaker 11:35 a.m.
Put it to him. [Laughter.]
Mr Owusu-Bio 11:45 a.m.
Madam Speaker, the
village existed and has been in existence for over 200 years, for our records. It even happens to be the stool village for Hon Cecilia Dapaah's mother who happens to be a queenmother. So that village is an old one.
Madam Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Give information
and I think he can give it to the Minister. Let us move on to the next Question.
Hon Minister, thank you very much for
coming to enlighten us.
MINISTRY OF CHIEFTAINCY 11:45 a.m.

AND CULTURE 11:45 a.m.

Minister for Chieftaincy and Culture (Mr Alexander Asum-Ahensah) 11:45 a.m.
Madam Speaker, some amount of progress has been made by some of the Regional Houses of Chiefs in dealing with the backlog of chieftaincy cases in the country since 2009.
As at 31st May 2010, the Ashanti Region had 26 chieftaincy cases pending, having disposed of 9 cases; Eastern Region had 11 chieftaincy cases pending and they

have disposed of 3; Central Region had 31 cases pending and they have disposed of 3; Brong Ahafo Region had 55 chieftaincy cases pending, having disposed of 10; Upper West Region had 10 chieftaincy cases pending, having disposed of 1; Greater Accra Region had 27 chieftaincy cases pending, having disposed of 1; and Western Region had 9 chieftaincy cases pending, having disposed of 3.

Two of the three remaining regions, namely Northern and Upper East Regions have not been able to dispose of any of their cases because they do not have counsel. As at 31st May, 2010, the Northern Region had 10 chieftaincy cases pending. The Upper East had 1 chieftaincy case pending. This Ministry is, therefore making efforts to secure counsel for these Houses of Chiefs.

In the case of the Volta Region, even though a counsel has been at post since 2008, the House has not been able to dispose of any of the chieftaincy cases because the cases which were started by the Judicial Committee cannot continue for the simple reason that one party or the other is before the High Court in Ho invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court. Hence as at 31st May, 2010, the House had 32 chieftaincy cases pending.

Madam Speaker, the issue of so many chieftaincy disputes is a great source of worry to the Government. Rather, unfortunately, in these matters, there is a limit to what the Ministry can do when it comes to deciding who is or who is not a chief.

Madam Speaker, the relevant law regarding the non-interference of Government in chieftaincy matters is article 270 (2) of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana and with your permission, I quote:

“Parliament shall have no power to

enact any law which --

(a) confers on any person or authority the right to accord or withdraw recognition to or from a chief for any purpose whatsoever; or

(b) in any way detracts or derogates from the honour and dignity of the institution of chieftaincy”.

Admittedly, the lack of adequate resources is a hindrance to the effective operations of the Judicial Committees of the various Regional Houses of Chiefs. It is for this reason that the Ministry is liaising with the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development to ensure that the Regional Co-ordinating Councils of the various regions can assist Regional Houses of Chiefs with financial resources, where required, so that the delivery of justice and adjudication in chieftaincy matters will be expedited.
Mr Kunsu 11:45 a.m.
Madam Speaker, the Answer given by the Hon Minister is comprehensive to me, so I am satisfied.
Madam Speaker 11:45 a.m.
Thank you.
Hon Minister, thank you very, very much for coming to answer the Question in such a comprehensive way. Thank you.
Hon Members, we have Statements.
I have admitted a Statement from Hon Akosua Frema Osei-Opare, Member of Parliament for Ayawaso West Wuogon.
STATEMENTS 11:55 a.m.

Mr Hackman Owusu-Agyemang (NPP - New Juaben North) 12:05 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity.
The S t a t emen t made i s ve ry comprehensive. Indeed, ordinarily, there is nothing to touch upon. But I rise because I am also a Senior Citizen and also very senior in this august House and to re-echo some of the facts that have been underlined.
Madam Speaker, this country and sometimes, some African countries, and maybe, elsewhere, are going the route whereby to become old is even a sin. They demonize the old people and what have you. Even in this House, Madam Speaker, it is happening --
Madam Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Well, is it in this House when I was Speaker? I have not witnessed it as a Speaker; is it before my time? Because as a Speaker, I have not seen aged people being demonized here. [Laughter.]
Mr Owusu-Agyemang 12:05 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I am fairly close to seventy years --
Madam Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Yes, go on.
Mr Owusu-Agyemang 12:05 p.m.
Madam

Speaker, and “demonized” in this case, is being used in its different sense --
Madam Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Anyway, go on.
Mr Owusu-Agyemang 12:05 p.m.
Madam Speaker, whatever it is, I believe that those countries that have made progress have adequately factored into their programme, the contribution of the people who are called the aged. It is very instructive to understand that President Obama, when he became President at age forty-six, had a Cabinet, none of whom was under sixty years except Timothy Franz Geithner, who was fifty-seven years. Every member of President Obama's Government was more than sixty years; it says something; experience is the best teacher.
But here, what we urge is a blend of the aged, those who are old and those who are young. But sometimes, the younger people believe that the old people have nothing to contribute. But then we say, “by and by, they go know”. “By and by, they go know”. Because at the end of the day, one finds that when all the difficulties that they create - our own children, nephews, nieces -- and they come to us. And what do we do? We resolve them. Our tradition says that: wunni panin, a, due”; to wit, if you do not have an elder in your family, then God helps you.
In every institution, be it a noble profession or legal profession, there is seniority and the seniority is so recognized but that does not mean that it is to the disadvantage of the youth. No! The future belongs to the youth but they must be guided. Most times, if we do not guide the youth, what they do become detrimental to themselves. They go to night clubs, drink, have cars to run about and they run the cars into gutters and ditches and kill themselves.
But at the end of the day, we go to other
Madam Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon Member, are you objecting to -
Mr Owusu-Agyemang 12:05 p.m.
Madam Speaker, the only time where we had -
Madam Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon Member for New Juaben North, let us listen to the objection. Is it an objection? Is it a point of order?
Mr O.B. Amoah 12:05 p.m.
Yes, Madam Speaker. I believe the Statement made by the Hon Member is to commemorate the day for the aged, more or less. But the Hon Owusu-Agyemang is turning the whole matter into the aged against the youth. I think that is not the import of today's Statement.
Madam Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Well, can you
congratulate anybody without bringing - Can you deal with this matter without bringing youth and old?
Mr O.B. Amoah 12:05 p.m.
Yes, Madam Speaker, I am coming to it.
Madam Speaker 12:05 p.m.
I am asking you, before you finish with your objection, whether you can even comment on this matter without bringing youth and old.
Mr Amoah 12:05 p.m.
Yes, Madam Speaker. The Hon Member's reference to the fact that all those who have run down Ghana cannot be classified to have been the aged, is not supported by the facts. Indeed, one person cannot run a country. A person runs a country with other people and as far as Ghana has been run all over the years, it is not one person who has the country, it is the government. And a government has not been made up of only a particular group of people, the aged as against the youth. So, I think his statement, with all due respect, is so broad and therefore, misleading.
Madam Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon Member, I think it is a matter of correction. When you say people run the country, he is saying it is a government, not one person, so age there -- government is made up of all ages. Insofar as the correction goes, what do you say?
Mr Owusu-Agyemang 12:05 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I believe that I am old enough to understand precisely how to contribute to Statements and what not. And I believe that I need no lessons and tutorials on what I said. What I am saying is that, I am trying to underscore the importance of age in our daily lives and I want to prove the point.
Let us start; Dr Kwame Nkrumah, when he started here, he was supposed to be a young man. What did he do? Eventually, he wanted to introduce a one- party State and the Preventive Detention
Act (PDA) and the rest.
Madam Speaker, we could go on; the late Lt. Gen. Akwasi A. Afrifa, former President Jerry John Rawlings and all the rest. The only time when we have had a government which has gone the whole hog without any problems and handed over, was when we had President John Agyekum Kufuor come to power. [Interruptions.] And now, we have His Excellency President Atta Mills who is governing well, so nobody has already created anything against him. All the young ones who came were always full of revolutionary zeal and they were -
Madam Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Hon Hackman Owusu-Agyemang, have you finished or?
Dr Matthew Opoku Prempeh 12:05 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I guess in this House, definitions should matter to us. When we have a country where the life expectancy is sixty years, what is the definition of the aged? It is not as in developed countries or advanced nations where it is eighty years, at least, if we take fifty per cent of sixty, it is thirty? So, in the definition of “youth”, it should be probably all those who are less than thirty years.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker 12:05 p.m.
Another point of correction.
Mr Owusu-Agyemang 12:05 p.m.
Madam Speaker, even the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana says one must be forty years before one becomes President.
The point that I am making is that everybody has got a role to play in society and it is about time we placed adequate emphasis on the fact that the aged can also have something to contribute to hand over to the generations, and generations yet unborn. That is the only way to develop and I am happy that the State is recognizing the contributions of the aged - and “aged” here, the “senior citizens”
is defined as sixty years and above -- to society because they have a lot to learn.
Madam Speaker, when you took the Chair, because of your experience and your maturity and your age, within the shortest possible time, you are running this place very aptly for all of us and nobody is complaining and so, I believe that the Statement -
Madam Speaker 12:15 p.m.
Hon Owusu- Agyemang, thank you. But I cannot play football.
Mr Owusu-Agyemang 12:15 p.m.
If you want to play football, we will see. Next time, you will be in the goal post, maybe.
Madam Speaker, in conclusion, let me say that this nation is, indeed, recognizing the role of the aged and what we need to do now is that -- Sometimes some of the younger generation do not take care of their aged parents and we do not have homes for the aged in this country and then they become destitutes and they have problems. I believe it is about time that we had -- I do not know what scientifically we call it, but we have a place, a hospice or something where they would keep the aged who have no place to go.
Madam Speaker, finally, I am sorry, the Hon Member for Manhyia has made a statement and is gone. Lancet, Madam Speaker, Lancet, the world's leading general medical journal in the United Kingdom, just published that as one grows older, one becomes wiser and one's intelligence becomes sharper. That is not me; he is a doctor and he should know.
Madam Speaker, on that note, I would like to congratulate the Hon Member who made the Statement -
Madam Speaker 12:15 p.m.
Well, he is here -
Mr Owusu-Agyemang 12:15 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I have had the opportunity to add to that and to say that I also congratulate
Mr Owusu-Agyemang 12:15 p.m.


the Government for what they have been able to do for the aged. But a lot more remains to be done and the aged should also realise the contribution that the youth can make and the happy blend of the experience of the aged and the enthusiasm and exuberance of the young ones are what we need together as a nation to move forward.

Thank you very much.
Madam Speaker 12:15 p.m.
Thank you too.
Alhaj i Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka (NDC - Asawase): Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise to support the Statement made by the Hon Member for Ayawaso West Wuogon, who is also my “mother”.
Madam Speaker, it is said in Africa that,
“You should watch what I am today because yesterday, I was like you; tomorrow you will be like me”.
Typically, it means that when one sees an aged person and one just thinks he was stupid that is why he is weak, if one is lucky, one will wake up and one will be like him. It is very, very important that we look at our setting and re-align ourselves.
Madam Speaker, when some of us were growing up, when we were very little children, we saw how communities veered towards the aged; how everything in our communities was done with full consultation of the elderly in the community. Madam Speaker, it was not about how rich one was; it was not about how intelligent one was; it was about how old one was. It was impossible for a house or a community to take any critical decision without involving the aged.
Madam Speaker, for one reason or the other and an unfortunate adoption of
lifestyles from elsewhere, we have found ourselves at crossroads where the aged, with the greatest respect, as one of my senior Colleagues rightly mentioned, it is becoming like a crime to be old because of closely calling -- even stigmatization.
If we look at somewhere in the North where we have a camp called the Witches' Camp, when one goes there, one will never see a witch who is youthful, a young woman; all those one sees there are old women. These are mothers who have laboured and given birth to children; they have gone through thick and thin and brought them up.
When they are successful, then they say that these same mothers who could have killed them the very day they were born -- now that they are strong, when they go through some difficulties in life, they tell them that it is their mother, who laboured to bring them up all this while, who is the cause of their problems. And unfortunately, we get many of us believing this and going to dump our old persons in very unfortunate situations.
Madam Speaker, today, if we look at even the Pension Schemes that we have in our country, people put all their lives - Madam Speaker, I had the opportunity of having a peep where one sees - Even at 10.00 p.m. when one goes round offices, one sees people working just to make sure that there is progress in our country. When they retire, we meet them at the bank and they are going to withdraw that so-called pension that they have Madam Speaker, one feels sad and one asks oneself as a young person whether one will want to belong to that category of persons.
Madam Speaker, what effect do we see today? It is making almost everybody aggressive. People think that, “Hey, let's make Hey while the sun shines. Now that I am strong, let me use every means, whether legal or illegal, to acquire wealth so that I do not become like the old man that I saw.”
Madam Speaker, I think this is something that we should know that has serious effects on our economy because people are struggling to do all manner of things just to prevent a situation where they would find themselves becoming destitute.
This cannot be right, Madam Speaker. A country that thinks about its future would definitely have to factor in the aged because when it becomes very difficult, we would all admit, when it becomes very tough, whether we like it or not, we would quickly run to the old man in the house to find out, “in this situation what do I do?” This means that they are very, very important; we cannot just push them to the background.
Madam Speaker, we need to develop a system where the aged are respected and their views are brought on board in churches, in the mosques. It is said in Islam that once one hits 70 years -- Allah himself has said in the Holy Qur'an that He respects the grey such that when one hits 70 years, it is impossible for one to raise one's hands to prey without Allah listening to one's prayer. That is why we see in many Muslim communities that the Imams are very aged. The belief is that Allah, as he said, respects the aged. When these people lead, no matter their shortfalls, we believe that when they raise their hands to pray, it is accepted. These are the things that we need to bring back into our society.
When we go to churches today, and in the mosques, very important places are reserved for the rich. We have so soon forgotten the aged, the experienced. Madam Speaker, this cannot be right. What other effect does it have on the youth?
Madam Speaker, because of the way we treat the aged, one realises that when people are heading towards 60 years, then they begin doctoring their birth certificates and changing their dates of birth simply because they are afraid of getting there.
When they do these, the youth that are supposed to take over from them have to keep waiting and then there is unnecessary tension building up at the youth front, whereas the aged keep back-tracking their ages.
rose
Alhaji Muntaka 12:15 p.m.
Madam Speaker - -- [Interruption]-- Madam Speaker, the aged are people whom we must respect --
Madam Speaker 12:15 p.m.
Is it a point of order?
Mr Twumasi-Appiah 12:15 p.m.
Madam Speaker, my Hon Colleague just made a very serious point on the floor of this House and I am also a member of the Appointments Committee of this House. He should either mention the nominee's name or if he cannot do that, he should withdraw the statement.
Thank you very much.
Madam Speaker 12:15 p.m.
Oh, he does not have to mention any names. He is just contributing and bringing certain matters
Madam Speaker 12:15 p.m.


up.
Alhaji Muntaka 12:25 p.m.
Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, the aged need to be respected. We need to factor the aged in our planning and many things.
Madam Speaker, in advanced countries, when people like my “uncle”, Hon Owusu- Agyemang from New Juaben North retire, they are encouraged to go to the lecture room because the life experience, the experience, for example, on the floor of the House is more than a ‘proferssorial' degree. He is encouraged to sit down and be able to write all his memoirs, put them into -- experience - so that people can see who is Hon Owusu-Agyemang; how did he go through?
But because of the way we treat the aged today, when they retire, they do not even have the resources to sit and put down some of their life experiences and by so doing, we are denying our country a very rich experience base.
I think as a country, we need to take the issue of the aged as seriously as we have been with the youth.
Yes, there were some comments that were made by my Hon Uncle and Senior Colleague; I will not want to contest them. But the fact of the matter is that, we need both the aged and the youth to be able to develop our country. We cannot be at an antagonistic point where the youth think that it is the aged who are the cause of their problems and the aged thinking that it is the youth who are creating the problem for them. We need to have a country where we can harmonise, be able to see the role each group plays.
Madam Speaker, I will conclude with a story my old man told me, that there was a village the chief came and said that everybody should go and kill his father. Anyone who has an old father should go and kill him. People killed their parents. But one of them decided to take his father to go and hide in the forest. Every morning, he would carry food, go and visit the old man.

Then the chief came to say he wanted the people to build him a castle in the air; the castle would not be anchored on the ground; he just wanted it in the air. He gave them one week, they should go and think about it and come back. This man went to the old man and he said,

“Oh, this is a very simple thing. Simply tell the chief to go up into the sky and show you the dimension that he wants. If he is able to go into the sky, suspending himself to show the dimensions, then you can build it for him.”

So they came back, the chief said, “Aha, my answer”. And everybody kept quiet and this man said,

“Oh, chief, with the greatest respect, if you could climb into the atmosphere, suspending yourself to show us the dimension, we will definitely build the castle for you within the week”.

He said, “Hey, you, your old man is alive.” [Laughter.] Because he could see clearly that this cannot be of a young person's thinking.

With this contribution, Madam Speaker, I thank you very much for the opportunity and I urge my Hon “Mother' to continue giving such wonderful Statements.
Mrs Gifty E. Kusi (NPP 12:25 p.m.
None

Nsuaem): Thank you, Madam Speaker, for the opportunity to contribute to the Statement ably made by the Hon Member of Parliament for Ayawaso West Wuogon.

Madam Speaker, the old in our

Ghanaian culture have been associated with wisdom and grey hair, which is considered glorious. Just as my Hon Colleague said, in most of our villages, when they have a problem, they will say, “Let us go and ask the old woman” -- Yenkobisa abrewa. But the elderly in Ghana receive little support from the Government and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). Most of them are supported by their relatives but if any

of them do not have relatives, then they suffer.

In almost all families, grandparents

have been considered as a blessing, especially in the recent past where most working mothers and widowed spouses found solace in the fact that their parents helped them to take care of their children when they went to school or they went to work.

However, in most of the cases, the aged who are honoured are those who themselves, by dint of hard work, had been able to look after their children who in turn would look after them. There is a saying in Akan, which goes like: Se wohwe obi na nese fifre a, ono so behwe wo ma woseatutu; to wit, “If you look after somebody when the person is a baby, the person will also look after you when you are old,” literally. But, Madam Speaker, we have some people who make it a point not to look after their children and therefore, when they grow old, they do not have any relative to look after them. Such people are also not supported by the Government and therefore, they fall into problems when they are old.

Madam Speaker, Parliament has passed certain laws which have helped a little, they helped the aged to some extent. For example, the PNDCL 111, where widows are now entitled to their properties when their husbands leave them and also the National Health Insurance Scheme, which takes care of the aged who could not pay user fees but now they can make use of the health facilities because of the National Health Insurance.

Also, wi th modernisat ion and urbanisation and improvement in technology, most families no longer have the use of their aged parents, especially with the invention of blenders and washing

machines and dishwashers where people no longer want to live with their aged parents.

These days, people do not ask their mothers to come and live with them so often because nursery schools are in abundance. That notwithstanding, it is time that we looked after the aged because they have contributed a lot to the building of the nation.

I wi l l commend the previous Government and the present Government for continuing with the three-tier pension scheme that is demonstrating the effect that it is going to enhance the income of the aged when the time comes for people to access these pensions.

I want to urge all of us to ensure that if we have an aged grandmother or we have an aged father, it is our responsibility to look after him because the Bible says that we should honour our father and our mother so that our days may be long. It does not give any condition whether they have looked after us or not. Therefore, if we want our days to be long, we have to look after our parents.

Madam Speaker, with these few words, I thank you.
Madam Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Shall we have a last one?
Minister for Local Government and Rural Development (Mr Joseph Y. Chireh (MP) 12:35 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I congratulate the Hon Member who made the Statement for bringing up in detail what we need to do as a country to accommodate the aging population in everyday activities.
rose
Madam Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Is it a point of order
or you are disagreeing with him?
Mr O.B. Amoah 12:35 p.m.
Yes. Madam Speaker, with all due respect, the Hon Member is telling the youth of this country to serve and wait for their turn. What happens if the youth are appointed without waiting for their turn, especially with regard to presidential appointment? In this case, would the Hon Member give us more examples of what has happened concerning what he is saying? Because he is making a broad statement about the youth not waiting for their turn, et cetera. If he could give us examples, probably, that will serve well and if he could also advise the President in this regard --
Mr Chireh 12:35 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I see the
problem. Before I made the statement, I said that we had restored democracy and political activities. Therefore, any young person who wants to emerge and get to the top must go through the political process. I am not talking about young people - [Interruptions] -- when there was no democracy. [Interruptions.]
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:35 p.m.
Madam
Speaker, the Hon Member on the floor is misleading this House when he cites
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:35 p.m.


as the gauge, the example of February 24t, 1966. Madam Speaker, the Hon Member knows very well that if we are talking about youth in governance, the era to cite really is 1979, the Armed Force Revolutionary Council (AFRC), they were far younger than the practitioners in 1966 and even December 31,,1981, of which Administration my Hon Colleague was a proud member.

To all intents and purposes, when he became the PNDC Regional Secretary as they were so called, he was not above 35 years. Madam Speaker, let him cite better examples for this House; he is capable of citing those examples.
Mr Chireh 12:35 p.m.
I will not cite them
because he has cited them - [Laughter.] Why do I waste time citing them again?
In any case, I think that now that we have restored constitutional democracy, what we should be talking about is for young people to learn at the feet of older ones.
But that does not mean that an enterprising young person who organises politically and rises to the top is a bad load. That person must have that experience; he must have the ability to organise. And we have young Presidents and Prime Ministers all over the world; we cannot be an exception. We should not have the qualification barring young people from getting to some offices when they have gone through the mill; that is one.
Now, what do we do for our senior citizens? We must be kind to them, ensure that in all our budgeting, we only not think about the vulnerable in terms of women and children but that the aged must be considered. Indeed, some of them led very deplorable lives and it is a crying shame that people who have helped, contributed enormously for the progress
of this country, should be treated like that.
But I commend particularly the President who instituted this “Senior Citizens Day” to coincide with 1st July, our Republican Day. For Independence, we give it to the youth and the school children but as for this one, we give it to the old people to have good memories of what we can do. This cross fertilization of Independence for the youth and Republican status for aged people, is a good thing and we must all commend it.
I wanted to say something that the Hon Member who made the Statement had made; what is our aging population policy? Do we have one? This is about the time for all stakeholders -- and this is not only a government matter. It is for all stakeholders to bring their suggestions and ideas and to be collated by the appropriate Ministry and brought for proper policy approval for the whole country to know that we are concerned about the aged. I know some of you are matching very fast towards being in the senior citizens bracket. Others by their hair, I can look at, have cemetery flowers all over their hair but that is why we must take the steps now to improve it.
I thank you, Madam Speaker, for the opportunity.
rose
Madam Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Are you going
to contribute? Be brief; you are the last Member to speak.
Mr Stephen K. B. Manu (NPP - Ahafo Ano South) 12:35 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I also would like to add my voice to the Statement on the senior citizens celebration.
Madam Speaker, whenever we are talking about age, some people who perceive themselves to be young always
rose
Madam Speaker 12:35 p.m.
Hon Member, let
us take a point of order.
Mr Joseph Y. Chireh 12:45 p.m.
Madam Speaker, on a point of order. Madam Speaker, the Hon Member on the floor is misleading this House. You know that by improvement in medical care and good standards of living, people who are very old still look very young -- and he did not go to the function. So, he should not mislead this House by saying that he saw people - in fact, there are some people who even shaved their hair and you would
not know that they are over seventy years - [Laughter.] So, he should take into account what I am saying. In any case, he is not young. [Laughter.]
Mr Manu 12:45 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I have told you about the frog; if he thinks he is young, he should go and ask the frog and it will tell him. That is why I have decided not to artificially paint my hair. I want God to know that He has given me grey hair and I must thank him and display it because there is wisdom in grey hair.
People have artificially been painting their hair for reasons best known to them . [Laughter.] Yes. We can investigate those reasons - [Laughter] -- but I will still keep my hair grey and go to wherever I want to go and make appeals wherever I want to appeal.
Madam Speaker, I want to say that when we are celebrating Senior Citizens, we should do that with the sentiment of nationhood around us. Sometimes, I have the impression that if party “A” is in government, then the senior citizens that are invited tend to wear the colour of that party. If party ‘B' is in government, then the senior citizens that are invited tend to wear the colour of party ‘B', from the districts right through to the national; that is what I have perceived. I think that is not a place for us to extend our political gimmicks.
If we are celebrating Senior citizens, it should cut across the political divide and when we do that, then we will be telling people who are in active service that “work hard, when you retire, the nation would celebrate you, and not that belonging to a political party that will win power and celebrate you.” I think I should put this across.
F i n a l l y, M a d a m S p e a k e r, a s somebody who is interested in the aged, I have a Statement pending before your Speakership, on the aged. It could have
Madam Speaker 12:45 p.m.
I will investigate. I have not seen it but I will investigate.
Thank you.
Hon Members, Statement time is now over.
We now move to the commencement -
Mr J.B. Aidoo 12:45 p.m.
Madam Speaker,
before the commencement of Public Business, I have a Complaint to lodge and it is a complaint of breach of privilege and contempt of Parliament.
Madam Speaker, it is reported in today's dailies that on the 1st of July, 2010, Mr Kofi Wayo was on Citi FM and Madam Speaker, he went on to say that Parliament is useless and that most Members of Parliament (MPs) are criminals. Madam Speaker, to the extent that, he went on to even malign some of our own Hon Colleagues.
Madam Speaker, I rise on the wings of our Standing Order 30 (2), which says and with your permission, I quote:
“Any act or omission which affronts the dignity of Parliament or which tends either directly, or indirectly to bring the name of Parliament into disrepute.”
Madam Speaker, this constitutes a breach of privilege or contempt of
Parliament.
Madam Speaker, and article 122 of our Constitution also states 12:45 p.m.
“An act or omiss ion which obstructs or impedes Parliament in the performance of its functions or which obstructs or impedes a member or officer of Parliament in the discharge of his duties, or affronts the dignity of Parliament or which tends either directly or indirectly to produce that result, is contempt of Parliament.”
Madam Speaker, it is in the authority of these references that I lodge this complaint.
Madam Speaker 12:45 p.m.
I need to hear from the Leaders. I have not read the Paper myself. Hon Deputy Majority Leader - Hon Pelpuo, what do you think? I have not seen the Paper; I thought I will require time to look at it.
Mr Abdul-Rashid Pelpuo 12:45 p.m.
Madam Speaker, the issues he has raised are very, very serious and we will all be happy to know that it is the case that the person mentioned here has indeed, made those statements. We will definitely want to urge Madam Speaker to refer the matter to the Privileges Committee if, indeed, it is true. And so, Madam Speaker, I think the Hon Member should provide some strong evidence, so we can all support it.
Madam Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Hon Minority Leader? I said I have not seen the Paper, what do you -
Mr J. B. Aidoo 12:45 p.m.
Madam Speaker, for the avoidance of any doubt, it is in today's edition of the New Crusading Guide, page 7. And we have this caption “Parliament is useless, MPs are Criminals -- Kofi Wayo.” And Madam Speaker, maybe, I
Mr J. B. Aidoo 12:45 p.m.
In paragraph two for instance, it says:

Madam Speaker, I think I have made the reference.
Madam Speaker 12:45 p.m.
You have made the reference, give me time to read it and find out. Supposing a Paper narrates something as having been said and straightaway, without any investigation at all, we refer it to the Privileges Committee-- Is that what we do?
Hon Minority Leader, I thought before referring it that I needed to convince myself that it was even said at all.
Alhaji Muntaka 12:45 p.m.
Madam Speaker, with the greatest respect, I believe that my Hon Colleague rightly mentioned that it started from Citi FM and the tape is recorded. Parliament can seek the recorded version of the tape so that we will listen to it.
Maybe, a smal l commit tee or the Leadership or the Public Affairs Directorate of Parliament can seek a copy of the live recording and then it is played and based on that, Madam Speaker, you can take a decisive decision.
Madam Speaker 12:45 p.m.
Hon Minority Leader, does a Speaker straightaway refer it so that the Privileges Committee does its work or do you have to be convinced?
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:55 p.m.
Madam Speaker, in all sincerity, I have not heard the report that my Hon Colleague is referring to, neither have I read the content of the New Crusading Guide. I
believe, however, that the New Crusading Guide is a credible Paper, which should not attribute anything to anybody if it is untruthful.
So, I would want to go with the position suggested by the Hon Deputy Majority Leader that maybe, we could refer it to the relevant committee for further analysis and possibly, to invite him to maybe, give his side of what transpired and then we will know how to take it from there.
Having said that, Madam Speaker, I think that this House is made up of very distinguished persons and we expect distinguished and decent persons in this country to accord respect to this House. However, Madam Speaker, I do not think and speaking for myself, that we need to glorify statements coming from people who, with respect, have shown demonstrably so, to be irresponsible. People who have shown that they belong to the lunatic fringe of society.
Madam Speaker, we should not glorify idiocy in this House - [Some Hon Members: Yes!] -- And in my view, we should allow this matter to rest because that man, for whatever he thinks of himself, does not have any equal in this House. [Hear! Hear!]
Madam Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Hon Doe Adjaho, I asked the question - I was reading Standing Order 31 -- you are the Chairman of the Privileges Committee - I was reading Order 31. I have on occasions where I am convinced, referred cases straight to the Privileges Committee. And when I saw the words “may direct,” it appears to me it is not mandatory. I must convince myself. I know I have done it before but it was not “shall”, which means that as soon as I saw that I referred it to the Privileges Committee. Do I have any -- just to look at it -- I wanted just to know that?
Mr E. K. D Adjaho 12:55 p.m.
Madam Speaker, there are two types of --
Madam Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Yes -- I will go to the Second Deputy Speaker too.
Mr Adjaho 12:55 p.m.
Complaints -- complaint of what happens suddenly on the floor of the House and then the one that happens outside the floor of the House. My considered opinion is that, if it happens outside the floor of the House, normally, they have to give notice to you. They have to inform you for you to look at the issues critically before the referral is done to the Privileges Committee. And this one falls outside what happens suddenly on the floor of the House in the course of debate or proceedings. And ordinarily, the procedure is that the Member must inform Madam Speaker that “I want to raise this matter of breach of privilege”.
Then you look at the matter critically and give an opportunity to him at the appointed time, for the matter to be raised and then you refer it accordingly to the Privileges Committee. I am not in a position to say whether the Hon Member has hinted you or has informed you of this, that he was going to raise the matter of breach of privilege.
But while I might not use very strong words, like the Hon Minority Leader did, I would want to share his sentiments with him that as much as possible, when freedom of speech is involved, we should not do anything to glorify people when they come to say that they are expressing their opinion about us and it appears we the Members of this House do not want to be criticized, and in these matters, I would want to go slowly.
But I am very careful, because I happen to chair the Privileges Committee and I do not want any comment that I will make
on the floor to prejudice the outcome of your final determination of the matter. But I thought that in these matters, you may have to get the documents, you may have to look at them critically, convince yourself that actually there is a breach.
I have not read the Paper, I have not heard what the gentleman said and it is a bit difficult. And since it did not happen on the floor of the House, where everybody was, where you listened to it yourself and you are clear in your mind to do the referral or not to do the referral, I would suggest, with the greatest respect, that even if you are minded to refer the matter to the Privileges Committee, you get all the documents before you, then you can make a determination on the matter
-- 12:55 p.m.

rose
Madam Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Yes, shall I go to the Hon Second Deputy Speaker, I will come to you. Hon Second Deputy Speaker, the reason I brought this up is the word “may” there and then the fact that contempt can be committed before me or outside this House, or the precincts of this House, and whether I should not be told before we raise it so that I will be in a position to say -- what is your take on this one? What do you make of the word “may” there?
Prof. Michael Oquaye 12:55 p.m.
Madam Speaker, as lawyers, we are very used to contempt right in the face of the court --
Madam Speaker 12:55 p.m.
That is so.
Prof. Oquaye 12:55 p.m.
-- and contempt that is otherwise, but both of which may amount to contempt anyway. When it is right in the face of the court, our Lordships are swift in taking appropriate action on the obvious.
Mr Chireh 12:55 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I
think that if you would agree with the Leadership and the suggestions that they have made, this matter should really be referred to the Leadership to examine, not precluding what suggestions he is making about referring directly. The issue is that, in times like this, the Leadership of the House, and perhaps, also the Speakership, should have been alerted to this Statement before it was made. Once that has not happened, I believe that we should refer it to the Leadership and for them to advise Madam Speaker. That is my suggestion.
Madam Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Yes, I am going into all this trouble because I do not want it to be said that anything that is raised here, straightaway, mechanically, we refer it. And also to underline the fact that, once you go to the Privileges Committee,
it does not necessarily mean that you are going to be convicted of that. That is where the investigation starts.
rose
Madam Speaker 12:55 p.m.
Yes, let me hear you, Hon Member.
Mr Osei-Owusu 12:55 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I think the issue whether or not we should refer it directly or it should be investigated, has been adequately addressed by the Leaders. I, however, wish regrettably, to disagree with the Minority Leader on not glorifying the alleged statement by Mr Kofi Wayo.
Madam Speaker, this country is crying for decency in public speaking, in public arguments and on the airwaves. I think we in this House must take seriously people who will not only denigrate the House and Hon Members but also generally, like the President said, show disrespect to elders and so on.
Madam Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Last one before I
make my final -
Mr W. O. Boafo 1:05 p.m.
Madam Speaker,
thank you for the opportunity.
Madam Speaker, as serious as the allegations contained in the complaint made by the Hon Member are concerned, I believe that Madam Speaker does not need to rush into making a decision. I think the precedence should be set that before Madam Speaker makes such references to the various committees, she should be

satisfied that, at least, there is a prima facie case to warrant the reference to the Privileges Committee. So, I would caution that just as at times we stand down some of these issues for further consideration, Madam Speaker can defer for further consultation and review of the matter before a direction is given on this issue.
Madam Speaker 1:05 p.m.
I thank you, Hon
Member. I know that Order 31 says that when a matter is raised - a matter of breach of privilege is raised -- a breach of contempt of Parliament is raised, the Speaker may direct that the matter be referred to the Committee. My worry is the “may direct”.
Secondly, there is a distinction between
a contempt committed in Parliament, prima facie, and outside Parliament. And yes, I agree that if it is contempt, it is contempt but certain matters have to be looked at.
Being the first line to refer, I think I \ must satisfy myself that it is a proper case to be referred. Otherwise, the word “may” will have turned into “shall”. And that is why I have spent a little time here for people not to think we straightaway rush into sending things to Parliament. Nor to think that once you go to the Privileges Committee, you are going to be convicted; no, it is for investigation.
That is why I also must make sure that it is a breach of privilege. I will therefore, in this case, confer with Leadership. I would confer with Leadership, read the thing, and consider the matter. It affects the whole of Parliament. This one does not talk about one particular person or one particular party.
So, the effect will come out. It is supposed to be a contempt of the whole of Parliament and these are matters, however small they may be, which will have an impact on the final decision. So, yes, I have taken it.
Shall we defer it till tomorrow or something for me to make my ruling on it; with consultation -- Speaker will consult the Leadership.
Mr J. B. Aidoo 1:05 p.m.
Madam Speaker, the matter has raised a very fundamental issue -- the issue regarding the procedure of presenting a petition or plea --
Madam Speaker 1:05 p.m.
In the report, the
newspaper -
Mr J. B. Aidoo 1:05 p.m.
No, to Parliament. In fact, reference to the presentation
of the Hon First Deputy Speaker, Madam Speaker, in the case of petition, it is very clear as to how we should present a petition to Parliament. We have to give notice and all those necessary procedures would have to be followed. But with respect to a complaint, our Standing Orders -
Madam Speaker 1:05 p.m.
A complaint of
breach of privilege?
Mr J. B. Aidoo 1:05 p.m.
Yes, Madam Speaker.
It is not very clear as to the procedure to be followed. And for which reason, I would want to plead that when we come to review our Standing Orders, we have to look at this aspect of how an Hon Member should lodge a complaint in the House. Because in the case of petition, the rules are very clear under Appendix A of the Standing Orders.
Madam Speaker 1:05 p.m.
Hon Hackman is not
here. Hon Papa Owusu-Ankomah, do you know of the procedure where the Speaker is informed in advance about what is to be raised here about privilege for her to make her considered decision? Or is it as soon as we come here and it is raised whether the contempt was committed in the precincts or outside Parliament, the decision should really go straight to Privileges Committee considering the word “may” there? That is what we are thinking of.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:05 p.m.
Madam
Speaker, as far as I know, in all matters that are going to be raised in the House, if the Speaker has prior notice together with the Leadership, it facilitates the work of the House. That is the general statement I can make. I am sure that is why every morning, Madam Speaker holds a conference with Leadership. It is all about facilitating the Business of the House.
But one cannot discount the fact that ambushing in parliamentary practice is also allowed. You ambush, particularly the government; sometimes it is part of the parliamentary style. But generally, you give notice to Madam Speaker, discuss with Leadership, you can state your position variously. It may be different.
When it comes to the floor of the House, it is no surprise to Leadership because at anytime, Madam Speaker is guided by Leadership so as to take a position that will facilitate the Business of the House. That is the general statement I can make, Madam Speaker.
I thank you.
Madam Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Yes, I thank you. I
think I am with you here. It would have facilitated if I even knew it this morning and had time to make the decision. Because of the word “may,” it did not say “shall”, which means that as soon as it is brought to my attention, I refer it. I am taking interest in the word “may” and not making it appear every little thing goes to the Privileges Committee. I am inclined to confer with Leadership so that tomorrow, I will make a ruling and decide what to do. This is not to doubt the veracity of what the Hon Member said; this is concerning the whole House, not a particular Member or particular party.
So, I would plead that tomorrow, it should be raised again, by which time I had consulted Leadership, like in normal cases and make a final ruling. It is easier for me to refer it straight to the Privileges Committee but is it right? Let us follow procedure.
Yes, Hon Member, I saw you get up; do you disagree with what I am saying? I think tomorrow, I would do the -
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:15 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I really agree with the position you have adopted, except to say that the Constitution as per article 122 provides and with your indulgence, I read:
“An act or omission which obstructs or impedes Parliament in the performance of its functions or which obstructs or impedes a member or officer of Parliament in the discharge of his duties, or affronts the dignity of Parliament or which tends either directly or indirectly to produce that result, is contempt of Parliament.”
Madam Speaker 1:15 p.m.
That was what I

wanted to go and check up, with your assistance, come here and say, yes, it is contempt of Parliament, I refer it. So I agree with you.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:15 p.m.
But of course, you may have to satisfy yourself that you need to refer it to, maybe, the Committee of Privileges. Indeed, if you look at Order 27 and with your permission, I quote:
“ Notwithstanding anything cantained in these Orders Mr Speaker may refer any questions of privilege to the Committee of Privileges for examination, investigation and report.”
Then Order 28 also captures the constitutional provision in article 122, which is about repeated in Order 30 (2). Madam Speaker, I believe the process of referral is where you are concerned with and that is where you have referred us to Order 31, which is how to deal with it:
“Mr Speaker may direct that the matter be referred to the Committee of Privileges.”
The use of the word “may” in both Orders 27 and 31 -- just so that you may satisfy yourself about the terms and conditions of the referral and so on I agree that maybe, you may consult further with Leadership and then you propose the way forward. Even though, as I have indicated, my position is clear and perhaps, in this regard, if you have to consult Leadership, I may exempt myself and let my Deputy represent me, because I have already stated my position.
Madam Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Whatever advice you give, there will have to fall within the laws that you have given. So, you will not absent yourself. But yes, tomorrow,
I would take up the matter. Can I have the Paper, and then I will make the ruling tomorrow for bringing it to the --
Yes, Hon Members, shall we move on? I believe you have an Order Paper Addendum - At the Commencement of Public Business. We have an addendum, which I intend to take first before leaving the Chair. Laying of Papers - By the Minister for Food and Agriculture. Since he is here - Yes.
Mr Boafo 1:15 p.m.
Madam Speaker, before the Hon Minister rises to - [Pause.] Madam Speaker, before the Hon Minister rises to lay the Paper, I would like to refer to Order 77 (c). Madam Speaker, that requires the Paper to be laid for a period of 21 Sitting days. With your permission, I would read:
“Any Orders or Regulations made by any person or authority pursuant to a power conferred in that behalf by the Constitution or any other law,
(c) shall come into force at the expiration of a period of twenty- one sitting days of being so laid unless Parliament, before the expiration of the said period of twenty-one sitting days, annuls any such Orders, Rules or Regulations by the votes of not less than two-thirds of all the Members of Parliament.”
Madam Speaker, if the Paper is laid today and it is gazetted today, we would be left with 12 days before we rise on the 22nd July, unless the interpretation of 21 Sitting days is not meant to be 21 continuous Sitting days.
Madam Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Is it not automatic that once it is laid, it comes into law; unless -- Are you thinking that we might annul it? [Pause.] Yes, I get the point now. It is the Sitting days you were stressing on;
Madam Speaker 1:15 p.m.


that is the 21 Sitting days. Is it not?
Mr Boafo 1:15 p.m.
Yes, Madam Speaker, and I am saying that unless the interpretation is that it is not 21 continuous Sitting days.
Madam Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Well, if we go on
vacation, it would still be there and when we come back, then another ten days, if we do not annul it, it becomes law. Is it not?
Mr Boafo 1:15 p.m.
Yes, if the vacation is not going to interrupt -
Madam Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Since time is not running during vacation; then when we come back, after 10 days made up of the other 12 days that we have, unless we annul it, it becomes law. Am I getting it?
Mr Boafo 1:15 p.m.
Very well, Madam Speaker. My understanding was that it should be 21 continuous days. But if that is not the interpretation --
Madam Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Did i t say continuous days? We do not want to import words. [Laughter.]
Mr. Boafo 1:15 p.m.
That is my understanding of the purposive interpretation of -
Madam Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Let us come to the Hon Member for Sekondi, Papa Owusu- Ankomah, who has seen some of these things done. I straightaway would say I have not seen “continuous” there and I would not import it into it.
Mr Boafo 1:15 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I concede that there is no “continuous” there, but I was attempting a purposive interpretation of this, not the literal one, but -
Madam Speaker 1:15 p.m.
Hon Papa Owusu- Ankomah, is it done that way that we have the 12 days and then it lies in abeyance till we come back and after the 10 days Sitting, it becomes law?
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:25 p.m.
Madam Speaker, thank you. 21 Sitting days mean 21 Sitting days. If within a period of three months, Parliament has not Sat for 21 Sitting days, time does not run. So, if it is 12 days till when we rise, then time will stand still; when we resume, time will continue to run.
Madam Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Yes, I think that is
correct. That is how we do it.
Papa Owusu-Ankomah 1:25 p.m.
The
Minority Leader knows that.
Madam Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Hon Member, yes,
you know that.
Mr Chireh 1:25 p.m.
Madam Speaker, indeed,
it is the practice of this House and it has happened with a number of Instruments like that, where we would Sit, then it is interrupted by recess and when we come back, it starts. Otherwise, we are going to spend useful public time just making sure we do not do anything.
Madam Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Yes, I think it should be laid today and when we come back, depending on the time that it should become law, that is 21 days, it will become law.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:25 p.m.
Madam
Speaker, I believe you are right in the general consideration of it. Really, it does not talk about 21 continuous Sitting days; it is 21 days. So if we adjourn sine die and we come back, time then will continue running from where we left off.
Madam Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Certainly.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:25 p.m.
Madam Speaker, however, Order 136 provides, and indeed, article 106 (14) provides that if a referral is made to a committee, it should not be there for more than three months. And that means that, if it is there for more than three months, there is a problem except that the same Constitution which provides that it should not be there for more than three months, does not provide for any sanctions -- so that assuming it goes beyond that, there is no sanction. And which is why by convention, we have allowed the continuance of referrals to these committees even though clearly, sometimes they go beyond three months.
So, I think that just to continue the convention, we may allow the referral to be made and then sometimes, it is important that signal is given to some relevant institutions and bodies that some matter has come to Parliament and some referral had been made to a committee. So, I believe that we would allow the Minister to lay it and the referral is made to the appropriate committee to consider it.
I thank you.
Mr Adjaho 1:25 p.m.
Madam Speaker, the Hon Minority Leader just misled this House. The Standing Orders that he referred to indeed, which is in article 106 of the Constitution is talking about Bills. These are not Bills. The proper section dealing with it is what the Hon Boafo has referred to. This is a statutory instrument.
In any case, I do not see the basis of the complaint of Hon Boafo. Twenty-one Sitting days as pointed out by the Hon Member for Sekondi is 21 Sitting days. Nobody is arguing that we are going to implement the regulation before the expiration of 21 Sitting days. So let us have this Instrument laid, then at the end of the 21 Sitting days, whenever it occurs then it comes into effect.
Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:25 p.m.
Madam Speaker, with respect to the First Deputy Speaker, I am surprised at his understanding of a Bill and a rule or an Instrument. Madam Speaker, the Hon First Deputy Speaker knows that Legislative Instruments ensue from Bills. It is not a parent Bill but he knows that it ensues, it is an offspring and his interjection, Madam Speaker, I believe, is attributable to where he is sitting. [Laughter.] It is attributable to where he is sitting. If he were sitting at his proper place, Madam Speaker, I believe he will not give this interpretation to it.
Mr Adjaho 1:25 p.m.
Madam Speaker, I know that he does very well when it comes to these matters but on this occasion, his knowledge of the law is not up to the scratch. Clearly, a Bill is different from an Instrument. Different sections of the Constitution deals with the two different matters. While article 11 deals with Instruments, article 106 deals with Bills. If you look at our Standing Orders, the passage processes are different and therefore, for him now to say that they are all the same -- He is a very senior Member of the House and I should let the younger ones be learning the proper thing; he should not be misleading them.
Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:25 p.m.
Madam Speaker, this obtrusive language from the First Deputy Speaker would not be accepted to me at all. Madam Speaker, I have never said that a Bill is equal to Legislative Instrument. You do not need a hearing aid to listen to this. I said “it ensues from it”; that is the language that I used. So this application of thorns and thistles, Madam Speaker, will not help him in any way. He should come and sit at his proper place and he will have the countenance to debate in this House.
Madam Speaker, I thank you.
Madam Speaker 1:25 p.m.
I will take one last intervention from Hon Ahi.
Mr Sampson Ahi 1:25 p.m.
Madam Speaker, the Hon Minority Leader is referring to where the First Deputy Speaker is sitting and that he is making this comment because of the place where he is sitting. Madam Speaker, I have my seat very close to the First Deputy Speaker but any time we stand up, we make very, very cogent points and important ones as such. So he should not say that the First Deputy Speaker is making such a statement because of the fact that he is sitting closer to my seat and for that matter, American Man's seat. [Laughter.]
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker 1:25 p.m.
That is an interlude.
Yes, as we have decided, it can be laid and then effect will start after we Sit.
We go to the Addendum and Minister for Food and Agriculture, you may lay your Paper.
PAPERS 1:25 p.m.

Madam Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Thank you, Hon Members, the Chair would be taken over by the First Deputy Speaker.
1.34 p.m. -- [MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:25 p.m.
Hon
Deputy Majority Leader.
Mr Pelpuo 1:25 p.m.
Mr Speaker, the Attorney-
General and Minister for Justice is here, and the Acting Chairman of the Constitutional and Legal Committee is also here. So we can go to item number 8.
BILLS - CONSIDERATION 1:35 p.m.

STAGE 1:35 p.m.

  • [Resump t ion o f Deba te f rom 29/06/2010]
  • Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Hon
    Members, these amendments are standing in the name of the Chairman of the Committee and the Hon Member for Akropong (Mr W. O. Boafo). Have we resolved the controversies surrounding them, Chairman of the Committee?
    Chairman of the Committee (Mr
    Emmanuel K. Bandua): Mr Speaker, I think we have.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Hon
    Boafo, have you resolved the controversies surrounding some of these amendments which warranted them to be deferred?
    Mr Boafo 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, yes. We did
    them together with the Deputy Attorney- General and Deputy Minister for Justice during the winnowing.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Very well.
    Clause 1 --
    Hon Minority Leader, there was a certain amendment early on in your name about “practice”. Do you remember? What is the outcome of it?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker,
    I was even asking because the Attorney- General and Minister for Justice --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Have you resolved it, because it is not on the Order Paper?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker,
    the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice's position was that we should delete that one. I thought it was all right except before we got to the concluding paragraphs, in the debate that ensued, I

    made reference to it and I thought that there was a position which related to “practice”. But if the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice is comfortable with our deletion I --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    In fact, that is precisely why I called you because I have noticed that in subclause (2 ) of clause 1, there is “practice” there in the Bill, and that informed your amendment for consistency. So, if the position is that that amendment would not be carried, then they would have to move and delete that “practice” in subclause (2) before we move to subclause (3), which the Chairman is about to amend now. Look at clause 1 (2), the word “practice” is there.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:35 p.m.
    Mr
    Speaker, you are right. It was that that informed me to proffer that amendment for clause 1 and so, I believe that we must look at it. If she is insisting that we do not need “practice” there then, perhaps, we may need to delete “practice” in clause 2. But if I may, maybe, we could leave it to them to consider whether to delete “practice” as occurs in clause 2 or whether it is suitable for clause 2 but not for clause 1, it would be for them to determine.
    So Mr Speaker, you can go beyond that. But just flag it to the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice; let the Chairman of the Committee to liaise with the Attorney- General and Minister for Justice and if for consistency, we have to delete, as occurs in clause 2, we may deal with it. If not, we have to locate it in clause 1 and again handle it.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Hon
    Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice, I thought we should be able to finish with the Consideration Stage of this Bill together. After he filed the amendment dealing with “practice” and we wanted to inject certainty into the law, that when we say it is “practice”, then
    one is not too sure what “practice” we are talking about.
    But we realize that in subclause (2) of clause (1), we have “practice” there, so we go ahead and delete that “practice”. I do not know what to say but if you want us to defer it further, I do not have any objection. Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice, what do you say?
    Mr Ebo Barton-Odro 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was not at the winnowing at the time this particular issue was considered, and I would like to play safe by discussing with my Hon Minister so that we can get back to the House.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Very well,
    it only means that we cannot finish with the Consideration Stage of the Bill today.
    Mr Bandua 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 1, subclause (3), add the following new paragraph:
    “(c) an offence only under military law or a law relating to military obligations”.
    Mr Speaker, we want to exclude this and this ties up with clause 15 (f). If we go to clause 15 (f), there is a provision there which ties up with this and military offence has also been defined in the Bill. So I think it is in order that we add this very provision.
    Question put and amendment agreed
    to.
    Mr Boafo 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 1, subclause (5), line 2, delete “applies” and insert “and any other relevant enactment apply” and delete “in respect of and insert “and consistent with”.
    Mr Speaker, the new rendition would
    Mr Bandua 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I do not
    have any objection to this amendment. I think it is in order.
    Mr Haruna Iddrisu 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, could he clarify further what he means by “modifications”? Why would he import a word “modifications” when he is making reference to the Criminal Procedure Act?
    Mr Boafo 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that question
    should not be directed to me. I did not put it down. It should be directed to the Chairman of the Committee.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Hon
    Members, I thought the feeling of the House the last time was that the word “modifications” must go to inject certainty into the law? That was the feeling of the House. That was the sense we got the last time. Why is it that the word “modifications” is still there? I thought it was gone.
    Mr Boafo 1:35 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if the agreement
    was that the word “modifications” should go, then should I proceed to give the new rendition?
    Mr Boafo 1:35 p.m.
    The new rendition would be:
    “The Criminal and Other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 Act 30 and any other relevant enactment apply in respect of this Act . . .”
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:35 p.m.
    Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice, have you got the import of the amendment?
    Mr Barton-Odro 1:45 p.m.
    I get the import of the amendment except that I want to be very sure as to the use of the word “relevant”, “relevant enactment”
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
    Yes,
    “relevant enactment” is there but he is removing “modification,” do you have any objection?
    Mr Barton-Odro 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I do
    not think I have any serious objection to that.
    Mr Haruna Iddrisu 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with
    the deletion of the word, “modifications” I entirely share the proposed amendment of Hon Boafo.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 1 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr Boafo 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 8, pargraph (g), subparagraph (iii), delete “state” and insert “stage”
    The new rendition will be as follows:
    “ ( g ) w h e r e c r i m i n a l proceedings have been instituted contain the stage of proceedings”.
    The amendment is being proposed because when you go further to sub- paragraph 4, we have reference to the

    information to be provided, that is the date scheduled for further stages in the proceedings. That is why we wanted to substitute the word “stage” for “state”.

    Question put and amendment agreed to.

    Clause 8 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr Bandua 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, clause 10, subclauses (9) and (10), delete and insert the following:
    “The Central Authority may on receipt of a request, forward a copy of the request to the relevant competent authority of the Republic for necessary action.”
    In fact, the reason for it is that requests
    are received through the Central Authority and they have to send them to the competent authority for relevant action. “Competent authority” has been defined in the Bill.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 10 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Clause 15 - Refusal of Request for mutual legal assistance
    Mr. Bandua 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to
    move, clause 15 - after subclause (3), insert the following new subclause:
    “(4) A person aggrieved by the refusal to comply in whole or in part with a request for mutual legal assistance may apply to the High Court for judicial review.”
    This is to give the aggrieved party an
    opportunity to seek redress. Although it is a normal procedure, if it is put in here, it does not create any further problems. It does not spoil anything.
    Mr Boafo 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that
    is the power given to the High Court for judicial review of executive actions.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
    Who will be an aggrieved person in this case?
    Mr Boafo 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the aggrieved person may be the foreign entity or the foreign State. Clause 15 deals with refusal of request for mutual legal assistance, that is request from the foreign State or foreign entity. So, if they are aggrieved, then they have a right for judicial review and the forum is the High Court.
    Mr H. Iddrisu 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I
    would with your indulgence, request the Chairman of the Committee to give further particulars why he is specific on the particular relief that is being sought at the High Court. Instead of asking for redress, he is specific that he needs judicial review. Can he explain why he is specific with this particular relief?
    Mr Bandua 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it does not
    make much difference if you go to High Court for judicial review. But I think the appropriate word to use is to go to the High Court for judicial review for the matter that has to be determined by the body to be reviewed through the judicial process. So, I do not see why he wants me to use “ for redress”. It does not create any problem if we use “ judicial review”. That is my position.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
    He just
    wants you to convince him why this amendment, that is all that the Hon Minister is saying. The amendment is in your name.
    Mr Bandua 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am saying
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:45 p.m.
    Chairman,
    all that the Hon Minister is asking is, what is the essence of this amendment? What does it achieve? Hon Boafo tried to explain it that it is to review executive action in case of refusal. That is what Hon Boafo said but he wants you to add more.
    Mr Bandua 1:45 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, to give an aggrieved party the opportunity to seek redress for having been denied of that opportunity. So, it is to enable the aggrieved party seek redress. That is all. I think it is very clear, what I have said is just very clear. If the party who has been denied the opportunity of mutual legal assistance is aggrieved, he goes to the court for judicial review just to give him the opportunity to seek redress. That is about all.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Does it include a citizen of this country? That person, the person aggrieved there, is it only the State or foreign entity or it also includes -
    Mr Bandua 1:55 p.m.
    It includes the individual, the aggrieved party. We cannot deal with those outside; we can deal with the citizens of this country. So, our courts will only review matters that affect citizens of this country, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Boafo 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, on a second look, I realize that individuals can also apply for judicial review because under section 14, we have “Defence request for mutual legal assistance”. And that is by persons against whom criminal proceedings have been instituted or who have been joined in criminal proceedings. They can use the competent authority of the foreign State or foreign entity to apply for mutual legal assistance. The person can apply or his legal representative -
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Or a body corporate --
    Mr Boafo 1:55 p.m.
    Or a body corporate.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Have you tried to define an aggrieved person in the Bill to put the matter beyond doubt or it is just a new clause that you are introducing into the Bill?
    Mr Boafo 1:55 p.m.
    “A person” has been defined under the Interpretation Column, it says as follows:
    “. . . persons includes a body corporate, whether corporation aggregate or corporation sole and an unincorporated body for persons as well as an individual.”
    I do not know whether Mr. Speaker would like us to go further and provide a definition of an “aggrieved person” for the purposes of clause 14?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Is that definition there sufficient for our purpose?
    Mr Boafo 1:55 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, if there is doubt about what constitutes an aggrieved person, then we would ask the Chairman to provide a definition for “aggrieved person” under clause 15.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Very well. I think that we should. You mentioned a foreign entity, but if you look at the interpretation column, it is not clear whether it captures a foreign entity. But I will put the Question while we try to improve - yes, Deputy Majority Leader?
    Mr Pelpuo 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I just want to ask if the Chairman can explain. A foreign entity applies for some information. The information is not given to it, then he is applying for judicial review. It is not the court that denied him the information, so
    he can apply to the court for redress. I do not know whether that can be explained. If it is just applying and you are refused an application, then you apply to the court. But to go for judicial review, means that a court had taken a decision and then you are asking the court to review its own decision.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    In this context, it means judicial review of an administrative action: It is different from the judicial review where a court takes a decision and you go for redress.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Clause 15 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Hon Members, I refer you to Standing Order 40 (3) and direct that having regard to the state of Business in the House, I direct that Sitting be held outside the prescribed period.
    Clause 19 - Request for service of documents.
    Mr Boafo 1:55 p.m.
    Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, clause 19, subclause (2), paragraph (a), line 2, after “State” insert “or” and in line 3, after “State” insert “or entity”.
    The new rendition, Mr Speaker, will be as follows:
    “. . . the request relates to an investigation being conducted in that State or by that entity or a proceeding before a competent court of that State or entity . . .”
    Mr. Speaker, the reason is that earlier we had references to State or entity but in the second one, the “entity” is left out. Mr Speaker, if we go to the schedule,
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Deputy Minority Leader -
    Mr Dery 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was just assisting the Hon Member to say that if the court is considering it, then it is a competent entity. That is just all that I wanted to add to it. I think it makes it holistic.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Very well. Chairman?
    Mr Bandua 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think it should be as Hon Boafo has moved, with “State” or “entity”.
    Question put and amendment agreed to.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Clause 19 -- Chairman of the Committee, we are still on clause 19 -
    Mr Bandua 1:55 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this amendment has previously been taken.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:55 p.m.
    Pardon?
    Mr Bandua 1:55 p.m.
    It has previously been taken. I do not know why it has been repeated here. We have dealt with it already. Oh, I thought the last time we agreed that you did not object to the replacement of “dispatch” with “despatch” because they are the same? I thought we settled that matter?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe the argument was that “dispatch” and “despatch” are both one and the same word and they mean the same thing, and in this context, it is the same. So why should we delete and insert? It is most unnecessary.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, I think that I do not have my dictionary here but with what the Hon Minority Leader is saying, I am yet to doubt him when it comes to spelling. So, if what he is saying, that the words are the same, then this is really a drafting matter and let us refer it to - [Interruption.]
    Mr Bandua 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, he is saying the words are the same but as far as I am concerned, the words are not the same, anyway.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Well, I do not have my dictionary here but you agree that it is really a spelling matter? It is a spelling matter.
    Mr Bandua 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, spelling matter? The two words are correct. “Despatch” and “dispatch” are all correct but they are different words.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    They have different meanings? What are their different meanings --
    Mr Bandua 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think they have different meanings.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    What is the meaning of the one with the “ i ” ?
    Mr Bandua 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the one with the “ i ”, has to do with “dispatch” - ‘fast', and “despatch” is “to send something”. That is the way I understand them. One is “sending” and one is “to do it fast”.
    “with dispatch” and “we despatch” “something,' “to despatch a letter” and you do something “with dispatch”. That is the way I understand them. So, I see them differently, anyway.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, unless that word has appeared elsewhere and it has been spelt with “despatch”. If he is saying that it has appeared elsewhere and it has been spelt that way, then for consistency, we apply that. Otherwise, I insist that the two words mean the same; they are the same thing.
    Mr Speaker, because we are still in doubt, if you can allow me just one minute I will show to him that the two words mean the same thing. They may have two meanings --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    I will do just that.
    Clause 26 -
    I thought that we agreed that this amendment should go.
    Mr Bandua 2:05 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker, it is gone.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Was that not the conclusion we arrived at the last time?
    Mr Bandua 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was going to withdraw it because we agreed that it should go.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    So, I formally withdraw it.
    Mr Bandua 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I withdraw the proposed amendment to clause 26 (2); the amendment is withdrawn.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Boafo, the amendment is being withdrawn, you are a member of the Committee?
    Mr Boafo 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think the withdrawal is in order because that is the practice in the country. If you are not
    qualified and you come, you have to go through our requirements before you can practise.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Clause 19, Hon Minority Leader, you have your dictionary there?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was just saying that the two words mean the same thing, and this is 21st Century Chambers Dictionary. “Despatch” is not defined. It says, “see ‘dispatch'”. I have told him the words mean the same.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, go back to the “dispatch”.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, “dispatch” again,“dispatch” or “despatch”; they mean the same thing and for the meaning:
    “(1) to send mail or person et cetera for a particular reason” “(2) to finish off or deal with something quickly” “(3) the act of despatching (old use”) speed or haste.”
    Mr Speaker, so I told him, the two words are the same. Is he convinced and persuaded now?
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, do the honourable thing.
    Mr Bandua 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am convinced, so I withdraw this amendment. Thank you very much.

    Clause 19 as amended ordered to stand part of the Bill.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Chairman of the Committee, I think this “practice” thing, we should be able to deal with it once and for all.
    Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice, I think that what the Hon Minority Leader was trying to do the last time, was to add the word “practice” as you find in subclause (2) to
    an earlier rendition, adding ‘agreement, “arrangement or practice”. The argument then was, what type of practice? Where are you picking the practice from? This is more or less in the criminal jurisprudence area and certainty is very, very important.
    So we were not too comfortable and then the thing was deferred. If we did not bring it only to find out that, in your own Bill, you have put “practice” there -- Once we have rejected his, yours too cannot be here because the House does not think that we should be referring to practices that are only known to people - I mean, we do not know the practice they will be falling on and it is not the best in criminal jurisprudence. What do you say, Hon Deputy Attorney-General?
    Mr Barton-Odro 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe in consonance with what was done earlier, we delete the one in subclause (2) and then -
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, who would do that?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, may I plead with the Hon Deputy Attorney- General and Deputy Minister for Justice to liaise with the Hon Attorney-General and Minister for Justice because when I said that then consequently, we should delete the word “practice” as appeared in the subclause (2), she was insistent and later said she wanted to consult to see whether we should delete it. So, with respect to the Hon Deputy Attorney-General an Deputy Minister for Justice --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leader, if I remember your amendment well, it is not different from what is here because the argument was that, we should add “practice” to “agreement or arrangement”, and Hon
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:05 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the reason I am saying so is that, the explanation by the Hon Attorney- General and Minister for Justice was that, yes, for the mutual legal assistance which we are now crafting, we can only limit it to agreements or arrangements.
    But then as has been crafted in subclause (2), you are talking about what exists and as far as she is concerned what exists includes “practice”. That was her reason, and so, that is why I am saying that, maybe, the Hon Deputy Attorney- General and Deputy Minister for Justice may consult the Hon Attorney-General and Minister for Justice to see the proper way forward. But if we have to amend it, then when we come to the second Consideration Stage, perhaps, we can delete it but I will urge that --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:05 p.m.
    Hon Member, with your explanation, I think that we have to agree to your suggestion.
    I think that brings us to the end of the Consideration Stage of the Mutual Legal Assistance Bill, 2009. If you do the consultation and there is a need to delete, we would do so but with your explanation now, I see why they are referring to what was agreed on already when this law was not in existence. So, it makes sense.
    Hon Members, that brings us to the end of the Consideration Stage for the Mutual Legal Assistance Bill, 2009.
    Hon Deputy Majority Leader, have you done winnowing for the Economic and Organised Crime Bill, 2009?
    Mr Pelpuo 2:15 p.m.
    No, Mr Speaker. So we
    can call it a day.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
    Very well.
    Hon Minority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:15 p.m.
    Mr
    Speaker, yes, it has not been done and unfortunately, I think the Hon Majority Leader and I have an important meeting hereafter. I do not know whether the Hon Deputy Majority Leader could stand in, now that we have the Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice plus the Chairman of the Committee and then the Hon Boafo and Associates. I believe we could begin work on that, possibly, that is, if it meets the convenience of Hon Deputy Attorney- General and Deputy Minister for Justice and the Chairman.
    Mr Bandua 2:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think we
    have to fix another time so that we can get the Hon Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and maybe the Executive Director of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) to be present. So we can fix another time for them.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
    Very well.
    Hon Members, it is past 2 o'clock, so that brings us to the end of proceedings for the day.
    In the absence of any comment from the Leadership, I will adjourn the House.
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
    Yes, Hon
    Minority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, a rather melancholic observation is that the Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice has not been recognizing the effort of the people who have persisted while this Bill has lasted -
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
    I thought you were going to add the Hon Deputy Majority Leader because as far as Consideration Stage is concerned, the Hon Deputy Majority Leader is more consistent than the Hon Majority Leader.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:15 p.m.
    Absolutely.
    So let them see it and see well.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
    Very well.
    Mr Pelpuo 2:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am very
    happy the Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice is here himself and has heard this melancholic note. So, maybe, he will have to do something about that in future.
    Mr Barton-Odro 2:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I expected that they would show appreciation for what we have done so far because we have been up and doing. We have been active. [Laughter.] I know he is speaking in parables, what I am saying is that - I am also speaking in parables. That of late, we have been able to show utmost good faith.
    Mr Dery 2:15 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think
    that I would advise that this discussion continues at the appropriate forum.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 2:15 p.m.
    Hon
    Members, this is rather on the lighter side.
    The House is adjourned till tomorrow 10 o`clock in the forenoon.
    Thank you very much.
    ADJOURNMENT 2:15 p.m.