Debates of 2 Mar 2018

MR SPEAKER
PRAYERS 11:07 a.m.
VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT 11:07 a.m.
Mr Speaker 11:07 a.m.
Hon Members, item numbered 2 -- correction of the Votes and Proceedings of Thursday, 1st March, 2018.
  • [No correction was made to the Votes and Proceedings of Thursday, 1st March, 2018.]
  • [No correction was made to the Official Report of Thursday, 8th February, 2018.]
  • [No correction was made to the Official Report of Friday, 9th February, 2018.]
  • [No correction was made to the Official Report of Wednesday, 14 th February, 2018.]
    • Mr Speaker 11:07 a.m.
    Business Statement for the Seventh Week -- Chairman of the Business Committee?
    Mr Speaker 11:07 a.m.
    Business Statement for
    the Seventh Week -- Chairman of the
    Business Committee?
    BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE 11:07 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Committee accordingly submits its report as follows 11:07 a.m.
    Arrangement of Business
    Formal Communications by the Speaker
    Mr Speaker, you may read communications to the House whenever they are available.
    Question (s)
    Mr Speaker, the Business Committee has programmed the following Ministers to respond to Questions asked of them during the week:
    No. of Questions
    Minister for Works and Housing 1
    Minister for Agriculture 3
    Minister for Trade and Industry 2
    Minister for Health 6
    Minister for Railways Development 2
    Minister for Roads and Highways 4
    Total number of Questions 18
    Mr Speaker, six (6) Ministers are expected to attend upon the House to respond to eighteen (18) Questions during the week. The Questions are of the following types:
    i. Urgent -- 4;
    ii. Oral -- 14
    Statements
    Mr Speaker, pursuant to Order 70 (2), Ministers of State may be permitted to make Statements of Government policy. Statements duly admitted by Mr Speaker may be made in the House by Hon Members in accordance with Order 72.
    Bills, Papers and Reports
    Mr Speaker, Bills may be presented to the House for First Reading and those of urgent nature may be taken through the various stages in one day in accordance with Order 119. Papers and committee reports may also be presented to the House.
    Motions and Resolutions
    Mr Speaker, Motions may be debated and their consequential Resolutions, if any, taken during the week.
    Twenty-fifth Anniversary of Parlia- mentary Democracy in Ghana
    Mr Speaker, the Business Committee takes this opportunity to inform all Hon Members that a year-long anniversary celebration is being organised to commemorate 25 years of uninterrupted Parliamentary Democracy in Ghana.
    The celebration is expected to commence with a Speaker's Symposium on Monday, 5th March, 2018 on the theme, “25 Years of Continuous Parliamentary Democracy in Ghana— Challenges and Prospects.”
    The President of the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, H. E. Dr Abubakar Bukola Saraki, would be the Special Guest of Honour at the symposium to deliver the Keynote Address.
    The Symposium would be held at the Accra International Conference Centre
    (AICC).

    Representatives of the following institutions would be empanelled to speak briefly on the topic, “The Fourth Republican Parliament in Retrospection”.

    i. Trades Union Congress (TUC);

    ‘

    ii. Ghana Bar Association;

    iii.Coalition on Civil Society in Ghana.

    Mr Speaker, all Hon Members are accordingly invited to participate in the symposium. The time is 1.00 p.m. prompt on Monday, 5th March, 2018.

    The following dignitaries are also expected to be in attendance at the symposium: the President of the Republic and the Vice President, former Presidents of the Republic, former Speakers of the Parliament of Ghana, the Chief Justice and members of the Bench, the Chairperson and members of the Council of State, Ministers of State, former Members of Parliament, members of the Diplomatic Corps, Traditional Rulers, members of the Clergy, and political party functionaries, among others.

    Public Holiday

    Mr Speaker, Tuesday, 6th March, 2018 is Independence Day. The day would be observed as a statutory public holiday.

    Conclusion

    Mr Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order 160 (2) and subject to Standing Order 53, the Committee submits to this Honourable House the order in which the Business of the House shall be taken dur ing the week under consideration

    Tuesday, 6™ March, 2018

    PUBLIC HOLIDAY (Independence Day)

    Urgent Questions
    Mr Kwame Governs Agbodza (Adaklu) 11:07 a.m.
    To ask the Minister for Works and Housing what steps the Ministry is taking to reduce the negative impact of flooding in Accra with regard to the fact that the rainy season is imminent.
    Mr Kwame Asafu-Adjei (Nsuta- Kwamang Beposo) 11:07 a.m.
    To ask the Minister for Agriculture what steps the Government is taking to maintain the price of cocoa in the current 2017/2018 season at the level of 2016/2017 (GH0475/bag) when the producer-price in neighbouring countries have been reduced as a result of downward swing in the world price of cocoa.
    Mr Eric Afful (Amenfi West) 11:07 a.m.
    To ask the Minister for Agriculture if he is aware that the dried cocoa beans bought by the licensed cocoa buying companies cannot be evacuated to the District Depot at Samreboi as a result of the nature of the roads in the communities.
    Questions --
    *283. Mr Albert Akuka Alalzuuga (Garu): To ask the Minister for Agriculture when the Tamne Irrigation Dam Project will be completed.
    *284. Mr Richard Mawuli Kwaku Quashigah (Keta): To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry whether there is an implementation plan for the “One District, One Factory” policy initiative, and if so,
    Mr Eric Afful (Amenfi West) 11:07 a.m.
    whether the Ministry will furnish this august House with a copy.
    *300. Mr Daniel Kwesi Ashiamah (Buem): To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry whether there is a standardised structural design for the “One District, One Factory” initiative and who will be responsible for providing it.
    Statements
    Presentation of Papers --
    (a) Protocol between the Republic of Ghana and the Swiss Confederation Amending the Convention of 23rd July, 2008 between the Republic of Ghana and the Swiss Confederation for the Avoidance of Double Taxation with Respect to Taxes on Income, on Capital and on Capital Gains and its Protocol
    (b) Request for waiver of Import Duties, Import VAT, Import NHIL, and other approved imposts amounting to the Ghana Cedi equivalent of sixty- six million, six hundred and eighty-one thousand, nine hundred and sixty-eight United States Dollars (US$ 66,681,968.00) [equivalent to GH¢295,114,387.96] on materials and equipment to be imported by the Ministry of Energy and Weldy/Lamont Associates Inc. of Illinois for the implementation of the Turnkey Rural Electrification Project in selected communities under the National Electrification Scheme (NES) and the Self Help Electrification Programme (SHEP
    IV).
    (c)Annual Report on the Activities of the Audit Service for the Calendar Years Ended 31st December 2015 and 2016.
    (d) Report of the Finance Committee on the Concessional Credit Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Ghana and the EXIM Bank of India for an amount of one hundred and fifty million United States Dollars (US$150,000,000.00) to finance the Strengthening of Agricultural Mechanisation Service Centres (AMSECs) Project.
    Consideration Stage of Bills --
    Taxation (Use of Fiscal Electronic Device) Bill, 2017 (continuation).
    Committee sittings.

    Urgent Questions --
    Mr Alhassan Umar (Zabzugu) 11:07 a.m.
    To ask the Minister for Health when the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) will resume the registration of new clients as well as the renewal of cards of existing clients whose insurance has expired in the Zabzugu Constituency.
    Questions --
    *287. Mr Mohammed Abdul-Aziz (Mion): To ask the Minister for Health when the Ministry will upgrade the Sang Health Centre into a district hospital to improve health service delivery in the Mion Constituency.
    *317. Ms Felicia Adjei (Kintampo South): To ask the Minister for Health what the Ministry is doing about the proliferation and abusive
    Mr Alhassan Umar (Zabzugu) 11:07 a.m.
    use of analgesics such as tramadol in the Kintampo South Constituency.
    *318. Mr Andrew Amoako Asiamah (Fomena): To ask the Minister for Health the steps being taken to rehabilitate the following Health Centres in the Fomena Constituency which are in deplorable states: (i) Akrokerri Health Centre (ii) Fomena Health Centre (iii) Wioso Health Centre (iv) Adomanu Health Centre.
    *319. Mr Andrew Amoako Asiamah (Fomena): To ask the Minister for Health what steps are being taken to complete the Adansi North District Hospital in the Fomena Constituency.
    *320. Mr Ekow Hayford (Mfantseman): To ask the Minister for Health what plans are in place to renovate and upgrade the Saltpond Hospital which was built in 1920.
    Statements
    Presentation and First Reading of Bill -- LegalProfession (Amendment) Bill, 2018.
    Motion —
    Adoption of the Report of the Finance Committee on the Concessional Credit Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Ghana and the EXIM Bank of India for an amount of one hundred and fifty million United States Dollars (US$150,000,000.00) to finance the Strengthening of Agricultural Mechanisation Service Centres (AMSECs) Project.
    Consideration Stage of Bills --
    Standard for Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information Bill,
    2017.
    Committee sittings.

    Questions --

    *286. Mr Kwame Governs Agbodza (Adaklu): To ask the Minister for Railways Development what is the progress of work on the central spine stretch of rail line from Kumasi to Paga.

    *301. Dr Zanetor Agyeman-Rawlings (Klottey-Korle): To ask the Minister for Railways Development what the Ministry's plans are for the land on which the Abuja/CMB Market is situated.

    *326. Mr Magnus Kofi Amoatey (Yilo Krobo): To ask the Minister for Roads and Highways when the rehabilitation works on the Somanya-Mount Mary College of Education road will be undertaken.

    *327. Mr Kwabena Amankwa Asiamah (Fanteakwa North): To ask the Minister for Roads and Highways when the following roads will be rehabilitated: (i) Miaso to Aboabo (ii) Amokrom No. 2 to Papramantan (iii) Asrebuso to Agyenemene (iv) Mpaem to Adakope.

    *328. Mr Derek Ohene Assifo Bekoe (Upper West Akim): To ask the Minister for Roads and Highways when the Mepom - Canaan - Kwadwo Armah feeder road will be upgraded to a gravel surfaced road.

    *329. Mr Derek Ohene Assifo Bekoe (Upper West Akim): To ask the Minister for Roads and Highways when the Nyanoa - Abamkrom - Esaaso feeder road would be upgraded to a gravel surfaced road.

    Statements

    Motions —

    Third Reading of Bills --

    Taxation (Use of Fiscal Electronic Device) Bill, 2017.

    Standard for Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information Bill,

    2017.

    Committee sittings.
    Mr Speaker 11:17 a.m.
    Thank you, Hon Majority Chief Whip.
    Hon Members, any comments or contributions?
    rose
    Mr Speaker 11:17 a.m.
    Yes, Hon Member?
    Mr Mubarak 11:17 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to comment on the Business Statement which was presented by the Hon Majority Chief Whip, and in doing so, I would want to commend you for the Speaker's Symposium which I believe is a laudable one; the activities earmarked are also exciting.
    Mr Speaker, first I would want to suggest that for the speakers of the day, we know the Ghana Journalist Association
    Mr Speaker 11:17 a.m.
    Leadership, do you have any comments?
    Hon Majority Chief Whip?
    Mr Ameyaw-Cheremeh 11:17 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, in connection with the symposium, the Hon Member suggested that the GJA should be included. There are other programmes in which we would involve the GJA.
    The full programme would be unveiled to Hon Members by Wednesday. There is a Committee which is chaired by the Hon Majority Deputy Whip; Moses Anim; so the programme would be observed.
    Mr Speaker 11:17 a.m.
    The Hon Majority Chief Whip essentially is saying that he would advise himself of other matters and then, he would be competent to address them at the appropriate time.
    With that, the Business Statement as presented and commented upon is hereby admitted.
    Mr Speaker 11:27 a.m.
    Hon Members, item numbered 4 — Urgent Question.
    Hon Minister for Roads and Highway you may take the appropriate seat for Hon Frimpong Addo to prepare to ask the Urgent Question numbered 4.
    URGENT QUESTION 11:27 a.m.
    Minister for Roads and Highways (Mr Kwasi Amoako-Attah)(MP) 11:27 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I begin with the background to the Question.
    Mr Speaker, the following are the causes of the flooding at the Malam- Kasoa road 11:27 a.m.
    a) Sand winning
    Sand winning activities on the slope of land close to the Osiadan Company junction brings down large amounts of gravely materials, especially during heavy rains. This causes the flooding of the road and consequent siltation.
    b) Undefined residential layout
    The land after the road reservation has been described by the Weija Lands Commission as Government lands originally intended for irrigation. However, individual developers have changed the original land use into residential accommodation.
    Mr Speaker, there is therefore no well-defined residential layout that would allow for roads with drainage structures for effective conveyance and discharge of surface water. Surface water, as a result, has to find
    its own path through the buildings. This causes erosion and deposition of gravely materials onto the road.
    c) Inadequate sizes of the side of drains and access culverts
    The large runoff water with gravely materials coming onto the road exceeds the capacity of the side drains and access road culverts, especially when drains or culverts are partly silted, thereby causing a spill-over onto the roadway. Access culverts and drains are either partially or completely blocked with silt, after a few rains they are not able to intercept and carry the surface water to to be discharged in toponds.
    d) Untarred access roads
    The parent material of untarred undersigned access roads into the settlements and other unpaved surfaces are highly erodible and both contribute to the siltation on the carriage way and shoulder.
    Mr Speaker, the Ghana Highways Authority currently undertakes programmes that engages contractors to desilt all the drains and culverts as part of their routine maintenance programme. Contract for the construction of additional trapezoidal drains at the Osiadan area was awarded in November, 2017. This would increase the capacity of the side drains to intercept and correct surface water.
    Mr Speaker, going into the future, the Ministry of Roads and Highways is collaborating with the Ga South Municipal Assembly to stop further development in the area, to level the sand winning area and plant grass to prevent the washing of silt onto the road.
    Mr Speaker 11:27 a.m.
    Any follow-up questions?
    Mr Addo 11:27 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, since this has been an annual problem on that road, and since the Hon Minister has been in the Ministry, has he per chance come across any documentation or any attempt to address this perennial problem? This is because it has been there for years. Has he chanced upon anything like that, and would that support the programme that he has this year to address the situation?
    Mr Amoako-Attah 11:27 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, this perennial issue is very problematic and causes a lot of difficulties and inconveniences, both to the residents and the motoring public. It is a problem that must be addressed once and for all. I have had the opportunity to visit the site three times last year with my technical team. And the programme lined up to deal with the problem is clearly spelt out in the last paragraph of my Answer.
    Mr Speaker, most importantly, it has been realised that we have to grass the entire area. That is the only way that this problem could be resolved.
    At the same time, the Municipal Assembly would take steps to stop the continuous winning of sand in the area.
    Mr Speaker 11:27 a.m.
    Any further follow-up?
    Thank you, Hon Minister.
    Hon Members, the next Question stands in the name of the Hon Member for Techiman North.
    ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 11:27 a.m.
    MINISTRY OF ROADS AND 11:27 a.m.
    HIGHWAYS 11:27 a.m.
    Mr Amoako-Attah 11:27 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Offuman-Amoma road is part of the 17.3km Inter District Feeder Road which links Offuman in Techiman North District

    to Amoma Nkwanta in the Nkoranza North District of the Brong Ahafo Region. It is a gravel road with fair surface condition.

    Current programme

    Tender for the upgrading of the road to bituminous surface was advertised in November, 2017. Tenders were opened in December, 2017 for evaluation to select the lowest evaluated bidder.

    The Evaluation Report has been submitted to the Department of Feeder Roads Tender Committee for approval and award of the contract.
    Mr Speaker 11:37 a.m.
    Hon Member, any follow- up question?
    Mr Gyarko 11:37 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am aware of what the Hon Minister is saying so no further question. [Interruption.]
    Mr Speaker 11:37 a.m.
    Hon Minister, is there --
    Mr Amoako-Attah 11:37 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, by his statement, he is aware of the Answer provided, so I do not have any further answer to give.
    Thank you.
    Mr Speaker 11:37 a.m.
    The next Question stands in the name of the Hon Member for Ashaiman.
    Completion of Ashaiman Main Road
    Q. 296. Mr Ernest Henry Norgbey asked the Minister for Roads and Highways when construction of the Ashaiman main road would be completed.
    Mr Amoako-Attah 11:37 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, Ashaiman town is the capital of Ashaiman municipality of the Greater Accra Region.
    The Ashaiman main road is classified as a major arterial by Department of Urban Roads (DUR). It starts from Ashaiman roundabout on the Akosombo road and ends at Ashaiman underpass of the Accra-Tema Motorway. It has been completed to asphaltic binder level and in good surface condition.
    Current programme
    The contract for the Emergency Reconstruction of Ashaiman main road (6.0km) was awarded on 22nd August, 2014. Works commenced on 8th September, 2014 for completion on 7th September, 2016. The completion date was extended to 7th June, 2017 which has since elapsed. The contractor has de- mobilised from site since December, 2016 as a result of the Employer's undue delay in paying for work done.
    Works completed to date include:
    Ashaiman main road
    Construction of 4.1 km of asphaltic binder on a dual carriage.
    Construction of all kerbs.
    Construction of drainage, slab and other concrete works (with a physical progress of 95%).
    Construction of 5 No. Lay-bys.
    Installation of four (4) traffic lights (with a physical progress of 90%).
    Installation of streetlights (with a physical progress of 100%).
    Paving of walkways & median (with a physical progress of 65%).
    The progress of works is projected at 85 per cent physical completion. The outstanding works include wearing course
    and other pavement works, paving of walkways and median works, additional traffic lights and construction of the remaining lay-bys.
    The project is funded from the Consolidated Fund.
    Future programme
    The completion of the project depends on the Employer's ability to pay for the work done.
    Mr Speaker 11:37 a.m.
    Hon Member, any further question? Otherwise, the Hon Member for Ashaiman may continue with Question
    297.
    Mr Norgbey 11:37 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have a follow-up question to the previous Question.
    Mr Speaker 11:37 a.m.
    Hon Member, you may continue.
    Mr Norgbey 11:37 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, has the Government paid the contractor for work done so far? If yes, how much is paid and how much is in arrears?
    Thank you.
    Mr Amoako-Attah 11:37 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the original contract price was GH¢33,063,686.45. But a valuation order was issued for the project to expand the scope of works and that brought in an additional cost. The revised contract price, therefore, rose to GH¢102,486,332.72. Amount certified to date is GH¢55,551,989.01. The amount certified means that it is backed up by Interim Payment Certificate (IPC) and the amount paid to date is GH¢39,637,890.73. Unpaid amount therefore stands at GH¢15,914,098.28 and the funding source is the Consolidated Fund.
    Thank you.
    Mr Speaker 11:37 a.m.
    Hon Member, you may proceed with your next Question.
    Mr Norgbey 11:37 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to know from the Hon Minister when he envisages funds to be available to pay for the remaining work.
    Mr Speaker 11:47 a.m.
    Hon Member, please ask your next substantive Question and leave this one for the Hon Minister for Finance. [Laughter.]
    Question 297 --

    Completion of Lashibi through Klagon to Ashaiman Road

    Q. 297. Mr Ernest Henry Norgbey asked the Minister for Roads and Highways when the Sakumono to Lashibi through Klagon to Ashiaman road would be completed.
    Mr Amoako-Attah 11:47 a.m.
    There are two (2) major road projects being executed on the section from Lashibi through Klagon to Ashaiman.
    a. Dualisation of Klagon-Ashaiman Underpass through Lashihi to Sakumono Traffic Light (6.0km)
    Background
    The dualisation of Klagon- Ashaiman Underpass through Lashibi to Sakumono Traffic Light (6.0km) is a variation on the contract “Emergency Reconstruction of Ashaiman Main Road (6.0km)”. The expected completion date of the works was on 7th June, 2017 which has since elapsed.
    Current programme
    The contractor has demobilised from site since December, 2016 as a result of
    Mr Norgbey 11:47 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, has any budgetary allocation been made for this project?
    Mr Amoako-Attah 11:47 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the answer is in the affirmative since it is an ongoing project.
    Mr Speaker 11:47 a.m.
    Hon Member, any further questions?
    Mr Norgbey 11:47 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, which temporary measures are being taken to make the uncompleted section of the road motorable?
    Mr Amoako-Attah 11:47 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, since it is an ongoing project, the contractor is on site and it is subjected to the normal maintenance where possible, I can assure the Hon Member that grading and upgrading would continue to make the entire stretch motorable.
    Mr Speaker 11:47 a.m.
    Hon Member for Adaklu, the next Question?
    Mr Governs K. Agbodza 11:47 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to ask the Hon Minister a Question but I believe asking this would be in contravention of Order 67 (1) (h) simply because last week, I drew the attention of the Hon Majority Leader to the fact, that I asked the Question before the Budget Statement.
    Mr Speaker 11:47 a.m.
    Hon Member, at this stage, ask your Question so that you would stay within order.
    The Question listed 298 --
    Mr Agbodza 11:47 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, may I read Order 67 (1) (h) for you to give me a directive --
    Mr Speaker 11:47 a.m.
    Hon Member, ask Question number 298.
    Mr Agbodza 11:47 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I cannot ask the Question because I believe I would be in contravention of Order 67(1) (h) -
    Mr Speaker 11:47 a.m.
    Hon Member, we shall talk about other interventions at another time.
    Now, we are on Question time so we would go by that.
    Question numbered 298?
    Mr Agbodza 11:47 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am unable to ask the Question because I would be in contravention of Standing Order 67 which reads and with your permission --
    Mr Speaker 11:47 a.m.
    Hon Member, once the Question is listed, I would allow you to ask it.
    Mr Agbodza 11:47 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have the answer to the Question so, I am no longer interested in asking it. [Interruption.]
    Mr Speaker 11:47 a.m.
    Question numbered 299: Hon Member for Kumbungu?
    Construction of Link Road (Tibung, Kule and Ganuilga)
    Q. 299. Mr Ras Mubarak asked the Minister for Roads and Highways when the Government would construct the road linking Tibung, Kule Ganuilga.
    Mr Amoako-Attah 11:47 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, The Tibung-Kuli-Guavuliga road is a 22.50 km feeder road located in the Kumbungu District of the Northern Region. It is partially engineered.
    The road has been receiving routine maintenance interventions over the years to keep it motorable.
    Current programme
    There is no major rehabilitation or upgrading programme on the road.
    Future programme
    Engineering design studies for rehabilitation of the road will be carried out during the third quarter of 2018 and thereafter the road will be programmed for the appropriate intervention when funds are available.
    Mr Ras Mubarak 11:47 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, considering the very poor nature of the road, could the Ministry consider building temporary bridges in the interim because the roads are rendered unmotorable during the rainy season.
    How quickly could this be done?
    Mr Amoako-Attah 11:47 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Region would be directed to do spot improvement programmes and that would cover it.
    Mr Mubarak 11:47 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, that would
    be all from me.
    I thank you.
    Mr Speaker 11:47 a.m.
    Thank you very much.
    Hon Minister, this ends the Questions for you.
    Thank you very much for coming to the House to answer our Questions. You are discharged accordingly.
    Mr Speaker 11:57 a.m.
    Hon Members, at the Commencement of Public Business, item numbered 7 -- there are no Statements.
    Mr Ameyaw-Cheremeh 11:57 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, item numbered 7(a) is supposed to be laid by the Hon Minister for Finance. I seek your leave for the Hon Minister for Roads and Highways to do so on his behalf.
    Mr Speaker 11:57 a.m.
    Yes, Hon Deputy Minority Leader?
    Mr James Klutse Avedzi 11:57 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Majority Chief Whip is asking permission for the Hon Minister for Roads and Highways to lay the Paper on behalf of the Hon Minister for Finance but he has not told the House the reasons why the Hon Minister for Finance or any of his three Hon Deputies are not here to do so.
    So, can he kindly tell us why or where the Hon Minister and his Deputies are before allowing the Hon Minister for Roads and Highways to lay the Paper on his behalf?
    Mr Ameyaw-Cheremeh 11:57 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Minister is in a meeting with the President. He has discussions with the President and for the Hon Deputies; one is bereaved, the other who had been with us within the week is yet to arrive for the Bill that is under consideration.
    Mr Speaker, that is why I seek your leave to enable the Hon Minister for Roads and Highways to lay the Paper on his behalf.
    Mr Speaker 11:57 a.m.
    Hon Minister, you may please proceed.
    PAPERS 11:57 a.m.
    Mr Speaker 11:57 a.m.
    Item numbered 7(b) -- Hon Chairman of the Committee?
    By the Chairman of the Committee --
    Report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs on the Protocol to the Constitutive Act of the African Union Relating to the Pan-African Parliament Dated 27th June, 2014.
    Mr Speaker 11:57 a.m.
    Item numbered 8 on the Order Paper. It is a procedural Motion. Hon Chairman of the Committee, item listed 8, the procedural Motion thereof?
    Chairman of the Committee (Mr Mahama Ayariga) 11:57 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 80 (1) which require that no Motion shall be debated until at least
    forty-eight hours have elapsed between the date on which notice of the Motion is given and the date on which the Motion is moved, the Motion for the adoption of the Report of the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation on the Legal Profession (Professional and Post-Call Law Course) Regulations, 2018 (L. I. 2355) may be moved today.
    Mr Ben A. Banda 11:57 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Resolved accordingly.
    Mr Speaker 11:57 a.m.
    Item numbered 9 is a substantive Motion. Hon Chairman of the Committee?
    MOTIONS 11:57 a.m.
    Mr Mahama Ayariga 11:57 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that this Honourable House adopts the Report of the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation on the Legal Profession (Professional and Post-Call Law Course) Regulations, 2018 (L. I. 2355).
    Introduction
    The Legal Profession (Professional and Post - Call Law Course) Regulations, 2018 (L.I. 2355) was laid before Parliament on 6th February, 2018 in accordance with article 11(7) of the Constitution. Pursuant to Orders 77 and 166 of the Standing Orders of the House, Mr Speaker referred the Instrument to the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation for consideration and report.
    Reference documents
    The Committee referred to the under- listed documents during its deliberations:
    i. The 1992 Constitution;
    ii. The Standing Orders of Parliament;
    iii. Legal Profession Act, 1960 (Act
    32);
    iv. Professional Law Course Regulations, 1984 (L.I. 1296);
    v.Professional Law Course (Amendment) Regulations, 1993 (L.I. 1558); and
    vi.The unreported case of Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare vrs Attorney-General and the General Legal Council, dated 22nd June, 2017 (Suit No. J1/
    2016)
    Deliberations
    In considering the referral, the Committee met with Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, Hon Dep. Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice, Officials from the General Legal Council and Mr Kweku Ansa Asare, Director of MountCrest University College, Kanda - Accra. The Committee also considered Memoranda from Concerned LLB Holders, Association of Law Students' Presidents of Ghana and Prof. Stephen Kwaku Asare. The memoranda from the Association of Law Students' Presidents of Ghana and Prof. Stephen Kwaku Asare were submitted to Mr Speaker who referred both to the Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs. The Hon First Deputy Speaker later directed that the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation should join the Committee on
    rose
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:07 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I appreciate the import of what the Hon Chairman of the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation is doing. However, our rules do not permit him to do what he is doing. Mr Speaker, as the mover of the Motion and the Hon Chairman of the Committee, he should read the Report. Subsequently, he could come back and proffer some more issues that may not be contained in the Report and may not be known to the rest of us. Mr Speaker, but before presenting the Report, he cannot read outside the document. That is not permissible by our rules.
    Mr Speaker 12:07 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, please, read the full import of the Standing Order.
    rose
    Mr Speaker 12:07 p.m.
    Hon Ayariga, please, you may wait so that you could also respond in full.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:07 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I believe that my Hon Colleague knows what I am talking about but just give me a few minutes and I would refer him to it.
    Mr Speaker 12:07 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, if you would kindly read the rule.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:07 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I have just said that give me a few minutes and I would quote the Order verbatim to him.

    Mr Speaker, firstly, let me read Standing Order 86 (6) with your permission. It provides --

    Mr Speaker, I believe that the Hon Member understands what I am saying.
    Mr Speaker 12:07 p.m.
    Hon Ayariga?
    Mr Ayariga 12:07 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I do not know whether you have ruled on his point of order but I would continue.
    Mr Speaker, everything that I have said is actually captured in the Report and I would not read the entire Report to the House so that is why I have been summarising the contents of the Report. Mr Speaker, but everything I have said is in the Report and if you read it you would see that there is nothing I have said so far that is not in the Report.
    I am trying to summarise and that is why I said that I want the Hansard to capture the Report as having been read but I would highlight some things that have been mentioned in the Report. I think that it is a practice that is well known to this House.
    Mr Speaker 12:07 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:07 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is the problem because the things that he is saying are not in the Report. Indeed, all that I have said is also supported by Standing Order 126. Mr Speaker, he is supposed to present the Report to us but not speak outside the Report. Mr Speaker, after he has presented the Committee's Report, he could come back later.
    Mr Speaker 12:07 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, for elucidation and establishing our strong precedents; when the Standing Order says, in plain words, that a mover of a Motion or amendment may speak in support of it, what would that imply?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:07 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the necessary implication is that, firstly, the Report ought to be presented to us by the Hon Chairman.
    Mr Speaker, Standing Order 126 provides that and with your permission, I quote 12:07 p.m.
    “When a Bill has been deliberated upon by the appropriate Committee, that Committee shall submit a report” --
    Mr Speaker 12:07 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, let us go systematically so that we all set our precedent right.
    A mover of a Motion or amendment may speak in support of it.
    Please, does that mean that while presenting he cannot speak in support of it?
    An Hon Member 12:07 p.m.
    No.
    Mr Speaker 12:07 p.m.
    Hon Member, you are out of order.

    We have to get the whole thing right.

    Hon Majority Leader?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:17 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the sequence is that Standing Order 126 provides and with your permission, I quote:
    “When the Bill has been deliberated upon by the appropriate committee, the committee shall submit a report on it to the House.”
    This is what we must do by speaking to the Report. He said to us that the Hansard Department should consider it as having been read.
    Mr Speaker, usually, because the Report is voluminous, he might opt to highlight a few relevant issues but not speak outside the Report from the top of his head.
    Mr Speaker 12:17 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, then, while any Chairman of the Committee presents a Report, as I believe you have rightly said, he can comment or explain something that we all need to get clearly, provided it is part and parcel of the report. Nevertheless, the Hon Member is not allowed to go outside the parameters of the Report by way of his own personal contributions.
    If that is so, then, I am of the view that a person's comment might be objected to so long as Hon Members who have studied the Report know that a particular statement is being made outside the Report. In that connection, every Hon Member is entitled to challenge that presenter of the report who is the Chairman of the Committee to show where what he has said is in the Report.
    We are all learning here.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:17 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I said to us that the first thing he must do is not to begin to run commentary on the
    Report. He is running commentary on the Report that he himself has not properly presented to this House.
    Mr Speaker, the first thing to do is to consideer Standing Order 126. We could go to Standing Order 161 as well, and I beg to quote:
    “161. The recommendation of a Committee shall be presented to the House in the form of a report.”
    And with your permission Standing Order 162 says:
    “At any time after the report has been presented to the House a motion may be moved by the Chairman of the Committee for the acceptance of the Report.”
    Mr Speaker, so he cannot jump the cart and start running commentary when he has not presented the Report to the House. He is required to do the presentation first, and even as --
    Mr Speaker 12:17 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, let me come in a bit here.
    He would not be allowed to run commentary, and I believe that has been appropriately put. But in order for us to know whether or not he is running commentary, an objecting Hon Member would rise and say this is commentary rather than a presentation of a report. That should be said and contextualised. One must put it in context.
    There are times I wait before I rule because sometimes, by intellectual exchange, certain rulings need not be made. They could be mutually accepted in a process of examination.
    Hon Majority Leader, so long as you choose to say something, I would allow you.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 12:17 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, when the Motion has been moved, a person who even seconds it might just say that, ‘‘Mr Speaker, I rise to second the Motion'' and sit.
    That person also exercises his right to come in later to contribute. That is how the Standing Orders plays out in the Chamber.
    Mr Speaker, he has been here long enough. He knows what I am saying except that he has elected on this occasion to do his own thing, but he would be domesticated. He would not be allowed to do whatever he likes in the House.
    Mr Speaker, so I would want you to bring him back on track.
    rose
    Mr Speaker 12:17 p.m.
    Hon Member?
    Mr Opare-Ansah 12:17 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker, the issue goes to the core of our Procedure. If you read Standing Order 81, it is clear that a debate cannot ensue unless a Motion has been moved and seconded.
    Mr Speaker, there are two types of Motions that we, ordinarily, move here. There are Motions that in moving, the mover seeks the leave of the House to present a Report, and that Report serves as the commentary that, ordinarily, he would make in support of the Motion that he is moving. When Ministers move Motions in this House, you would realise that, ordinarily, they read a memorandum accompanying a Bill in support of the Motion they move.
    When chairmen of the committees move Motions, they then present the Report of the Committee in support of the Motion.
    Mr Speaker, it is only when that Motion has been duly seconded that the Motion is put before the House for debate. That is when the Chairman, if he so desires, could come back and debate as per the rules. If a Chairman of the Committee is allowed to finish moving his Motion, somebody would second and Mr Speaker would say, “the Motion as moved and seconded, it is for the consideration of the House.” It is then that, he is at liberty to introduce all those extraneous comments that he seeks to introduce in presenting the Report.
    Mr Speaker, when the Chairman of the Committee started, his words were, in moving the Motion, he would like to present the Committee's Report, and he craved your indulgence for the Hansard Department to capture the Report as having been read.”
    Mr Speaker 12:17 p.m.
    Hon Member, thank you very much for your brilliant contribution.
    The Motion must be moved, and it must be seconded, then it is for debate; debate simply means an Hon Member's viewpoint on a matter, essentially. Therefore, at any given time, when an Hon Member presents a Report, he is entitled to point out specific statements, that is essentially commentary, particularly, with regard to this or that. The Hon Member is disallowed from continuing to give his own viewpoint while presenting the report.
    But nobody has told me this is not in the Report. I am only saying it cannot be a general statement; it must be specific.
    Therefore, my ruling is that, any Hon Member who identifies any particular statement which is tantamount to running a commentary or debating is entitled to object. That objection would be upheld and the Hon Member who is presenting
    Mr Ayariga 12:27 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, to make matters easier for you, I would just read the entire Report. [Uproar.]

    Mr Speaker, so Prof. Stephen Kwaku Asare proceeded to the Supreme Court to challenge the introduction of an entrance examination by the General Legal Council as a prerequisite for entry into the Ghana Law School. The Supreme Court gave its ruling and said that the introduction of an examination is not contemplated by L.I. 1296. The L.I. 1296 stipulates all the requirements of entering to the Ghana Law School. It does not mention entrance examination.

    Mr Speaker, if the General Legal Council wants to introduce an entrance examination, then they must come to Parliament and secure an amendment of L.I. 1296. However, the Supreme Court would not disturb all that has happened from 2015 up to 2017. But for 2018 admissions, if there are no amendments to L.I. 1296 requiring an entrance examination, then they cannot carry out admissions. Pursuant to that, the General Legal Council --
    Mr Speaker 12:27 p.m.
    Order!
    Hon Members, there is too much background noise. Shall we please listen.
    Hon Ayariga, you may continue.
    Mr Ayariga 12:27 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, pursuant to that, the General Legal Council presented the L.I. 2315 to this House, which seeks, among other things, to introduce the conduct of an examination as a precondition for admissions into the Ghana Law School.
    Mr Speaker, we met all the interested groups during our deliberations as a Committee. Mr Speaker, if you recall, there were petitions to your good self, which you referred to us for consideration and report. So we met the parties -- the General Legal Council and the Attorney- General, who was represented by her Deputy, and we presented the position of the students to the General Legal Council. So we heard both the students and the General Legal Council and the Committee concluded --
    rose
    Mr Speaker 12:27 p.m.
    Hon Member, is the Hon Chairman of the Committee moving off tangent -- running a commentary?
    Mr O. B. Amoah 12:27 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am a Member of the Committee, and with all due respect, I think that because some Hon Members are not members of the Committee, the Hon Chairman of the Committee should allow them to follow the Report. If he could say, for instance, that this is the Background, he is referring to 4.0 and he is picking this particular point, then he moves on to Observations and Hon Members should be following. But if he is just -- [Interruption] -- He is speaking to the Report but he is not dragging Hon Members along.
    Mr Speaker, some of us know what is in the Report but Hon Members would be best served if he says, for instance, that for the Background, he wants to read point 4; for the Observation, he wants to read point 5. That way, then Hon
    Members would follow and know where the Report has ended. Then, when it comes to secondment of the Motion and the debate, we move on. But as it is now, most Hon Members are lost and it is not fair to Members of the House.
    Mr Speaker 12:27 p.m.
    Hon Ayariga, as the Chairman of the Committee, you may present your Report in a manner you deem fit and anyone who has any objection in terms of your moving off tangent, or any of the points I have raised earlier— and I made it seriously -- that Member may specifically draw attention or object specifically -- and I would uphold it.
    Please, continue.
    Mr Ayariga 12:27 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, so this is the Background, which is captured on pages 2 and 3 of the Report.
    Mr Speaker, all that I have said are captured on pages 2, 3, and part of page 4 of the Report so that Hon Members people like Hon O. B. Amoah who are lost could find their way.
    Mr Speaker, as I indicated earlier, memoranda were submitted. Some passed through your Office, which you referred to us and we considered them. The argument for and against are captured on pages 4 and 5 of the Report. Some of the things that I have already said were contained in the memoranda and the responses to the memoranda by the General Legal Council, which are also captured on pages 5 and 6 of the Report.
    Mr Speaker, the General Legal Council, as we speak, had initially proposed to have interviews after examinations but pursuant to some deliberations that took place, they withdrew the interview requirement and left only entrance examinations.
    Mr Speaker, the memoranda raised very important issues that definitely must be considered by the country. Those ones include, that students took a position that once they went to an accredited law faculty and obtained an LLB degree, they should have access to a law school to pursue the professional part of the training.
    That is the argument presented by the students, that if they were not permitted by some obstacles along the way to obtain access to a law school, their rights under article 25 of the Constitution would be violated.
    So, we met the General Legal Council and presented this matter to them. We asked how would they ensure that every person who has an LLB degree is able to access a law school to pursue the professional component of the programme?
    They raised the question of resources. They said that they do not have the resources to be able to expand the law school so that every other person who obtains the LLB degree is able to access a professional law school to go through the legal training at that level. So there is a question of resources.

    Mr Speaker, paragraph 6.5 -- We met with the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and raised the issue of how to ensure that there is access to legal education for everybody.
    Mr Speaker, with your permission, let me read paragraph 6.5 12:27 p.m.
    “The Deputy Attorney-General in contributing to the discussion, informed the Committee that, Government is aware of the current situation regarding legal education
    Mr Speaker, with your permission, let me read paragraph 6.5 12:27 p.m.


    and has started with the process to introduce reforms into the sector. He stated that Cabinet had already approved the draft Legal Profession Amendment Bill submitted to it by the Attorney-General. He also stated that Cabinet had approved the draft Ghana School of Law Bill. He was optimistic that the problem would be solved in the near future to give opportunity to students who are interested in pursuing the Professional Law Course to do so. The introduction of L.I. 2355 was therefore an interim measure to adhere to the ruling.”

    Mr Speaker, this was the representation made by the Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice to the Committee.

    Mr Speaker, the observations of the Committee are captured on pages 7, 8 and part of page 9 of your Committee's Report.

    The Committee observed among other things that --
    Mr Speaker 12:37 p.m.
    Hon Member, as much as you can explain in detail and present the details, with time in mind, since every Hon Member has the Report, please proceed and conclude.
    Mr Ayariga 12:37 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, so the Committee observed that there is the need to act in compliance with -- [Interruption]
    Mr Speaker 12:37 p.m.
    Order!
    Mr Ayariga 12:37 p.m.
    There is the need to act in complianc with the decision -- [Interruption.]
    Mr Speaker 12:37 p.m.
    Hon Members, order!
    Mr Ayariga 12:37 p.m.
    The Committee observed that, there is the need to act in compliance with the decision of the Supreme Court, which is that, there should be an L.I amending the L.I 1296 to enable the Ghana School of Law to conduct entrance examinations in order to be able to admit students for 2018.
    The Committee also observed that, there is quite a significant number of graduates with LLB degrees and so there must be adequate space to enable them enter the Ghana Law School.
    The Committee also noted that, the National Accreditation Board has been accrediting both public and private universities and has accredited some of them to offer law degree programmes without any collaboration between them and the General Legal Council, so the General Legal Council is unable to regulate -- [Interruption]--
    Mr Speaker 12:37 p.m.
    Hon Members, Order! We know our own procedures. Why do we act in that manner?
    You know we move procedurally and step by step.
    Hon Member, please continue.
    Mr Ayariga 12:37 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, with your kind permission, let me read paragraph 7.3;
    “The Committee noted that the National Accreditation Board (NAB) has accredited several Institutions to run the Bachelor of Laws progamme. Unfortunately, some of these accredited institutions are under resourced in terms of the requisite facilities needed to run a law programme. Thus, in L.l. 2355, the GLC seeks to allocate quotas to all universities that NAB has approved to run the Bachelor of Laws programme.
    Quotas are designed to match available facilities to an ideal number of students per intake. The quota system is also to bring some collaboration between the GLC and the NAB in respect of Institutions accredited by the Board to run the Bachelor of Laws course. The GLC informed the Committee that some of the institutions accredited by NAB lack adequate facilities such as a well-stocked Law Library to run an LLB programme”.
    Is this not captured? I am just trying to summarise and that is why I mentioned these issues.
    So based on these observations --
    Mr Speaker 12:37 p.m.
    Therefore, Hon Chairman of the Committee, in conclusion?
    Mr Ayariga 12:37 p.m.
    The Committee then made its recommendations; and the recom- mendation and conclusion are captured on pages 9, 10 and 11 of the Report.
    The conclusion is that your Committee, the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation, in the conduct of its work, is guided by the Standing Orders of this House, specifically Order 166 (3). It provides, and with your permission, I quote:
    “ (3) After each Order, Rule or Regulations is laid before the House, the Committee shall, in particular, consider;
    (a)whether it is in accordance with the general objects of the Constitution or that Act pursuant to which it is made;
    (b) whether it contains any matter which in the opinion of the Committee should more properly be dealt with in an Act of Parliament;
    (c) whether it contains an imposition of any tax;
    (d) whether it directly or indirectly bars the jurisdiction of the courts;
    (e) whether it gives retrospective effect to any of the provisions in respect of which the Constitution or the Act does not expressly give any such power;
    (f) whether it involves expenditure from the Consolidated Fund or public revenues;
    (g) whether it appears to make some unusual or unexpected use of the powers conferred by the Constitution or that Act pursuant to which it is made;
    (h) whether there appears to have been unjustifiable delay in its publication or in laying it before Parliament;
    (i) whether for any reason its form or purport calls for any elucidation. “
    These are the signposts that guide the work of the Subsidiary Legislation Committee. When we tested the L.I. against these signposts, the Committee could not come to a conclusion that the L.I. offends any of these provisions of Order 166.
    Mr Speaker, on the basis of that, the Committee came to a conclusion that the L.I. should be adopted by this House -- [Uproar] --
    Mr Ayariga 12:37 p.m.


    Mr Speaker, your Committee unanimously recommended that this House adopts this L.I. -- [Uproar]-- to enable the Ghana Law School to be able to conduct entrance examinations for students to be admitted into the Ghana Law School for 2018.

    Mr Speaker, this is the content of your Committee's Report, and on the terms of item numbered 9 and the Motion, I so move that this House adopts the Report of the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation on the Legal Profession (Professional and Post-Call Law Course) Regulations, 2018 (L.I. 2355).

    Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker 12:47 p.m.
    Hon Member, you may second the Motion.
    Mr Ben Abdallah Banda (NPP -- Offinso South) 12:47 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion that this Honourable House adopts the Report of the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation on the Legal Profession (Professional and Post-Call Law Course) Regulations, 2018
    (L.I. 2355).
    Mr Speaker, if you would indulge or permit me, in seconding the Motion, I would like to make a few comments.
    Mr Speaker, it is worthy of note that, in approving or rejecting the Report, we must bring into perspective the fundamental reasoning behind the laying of an L.I. for 21-Sitting days before Parliament.
    Mr Speaker, the reasoning is not far- fetched. In the celebrated case of Prof. Stephen Kwaku Asare vs the Attorney- General and the General Legal Council, the Supreme Court had the occasion of stating that the purpose of laying the L.I.
    before Parliament for 21-Sitting days is to ensure that Parliament examines it and satisfies itself that the L.I., first of all, does not conflict with with enabling Act; and secondly, it does not conflict with the Constitution.
    Mr Speaker, it is true that the Committee on Subsidiary Legislation, per Standing Order 166(3), has the mandate to ensure that the L. I. does not conflict with Act 32 and the Constitution. However, this august House is clothed with the mandate to promulgate laws, and it also has the responsibility to ensure that the L. I. does not conflict with the Constitution and the enabling Act.
    Mr Speaker, there is one fundamental issue that we need to look at. It is whether the conduct of entrance examination, which has been incorporated in the L.I. 2355 sins against Act 32 or conflicts with the 1992 Constitution.
    Mr Speaker, in so doing, I would crave your indulgence to refer to certain relevant provisions of the Legal Profession Act, 1960, Act 32.
    Mr Speaker, the first provision of the Act is section 1 (1), and with your permission, I read:
    Mr Speaker 12:47 p.m.
    Hon Members, I think we should be interested in the debate.
    Hon Member, I would want you to wait a bit.
    Hon Members, shall we do away with the background noise and listen to the Hon Member on the floor?
    Hon Member, you may continue.
    Mr Banda 12:47 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    With your permission, section (1)(a) and (1)(b) of Act 32 reads:
    “There shall continue to be a body, to be called the General Legal Council, which shall be concerned with the legal profession and, in particular -
    (a) With the organisation of legal education, and
    (b) With upholding standards of professional conduct.”
    Mr Speaker, in upholding standards of professional conduct, the General Legal Council may decide to take different forms of doing it. It may decide to adopt either an entrance examination or use an interview process, or it may decide to adopt any other mode of upholding standards as regards legal education.
    Mr Speaker, section 3 of the same Act also stipulates, and with your permission, I read:
    “A person shall be qualified for enrolment if he satisfies the General Legal Council --
    (a) that he is of good character, and
    (b) that he holds a qualifying certificate granted under Part II of this Act by the General Legal Council.”
    Mr Speaker, what it means is that, even if a law student has passed all his or her examinations, the General Legal Council still reserves the mandate to disqualify the person on the basis of misconduct. This is what Act 32 says, which is the enabling Act.
    Mr Speaker, with your permission, I quote section 13 of the same Act.
    “It shall be the duty of the General Legal Council to make arrangements --
    (d) for regulating the admission of students to pursue courses of instruction leading to qualification as lawyers, and
    (e) for holding examinations which may include preliminary and intermediate examinations as well as final qualifying examinations.”
    Mr Speaker, I would also like to quote section 14 of the Act with your kind permission:
    “The General Legal Council may, by legislative instrument with the approval of the Minister make regulations concerning all matters connected with legal education and, in particular, concerning --
    (a)The conduct of examinations, and the fees to be charged to those sitting for the examinations…”
    Mr Speaker, the combined effect of these is that the General Legal Council has the power to conduct examination and to determine who could have access to the Ghana Law School to pursue general legal education.
    Mr Speaker, even the Supreme Court in the celebrated case of Prof. Stephen Kwaku Asare, which I have already alluded to, acknowledges this fact when it says the following on page 14, and with your permission, I quote:
    “The provision in Section 13 of the Legal Profession Act, Act 32 on which reliance is placed to sustain the argument of the first defendant, only authorise the Council by
    Mr Speaker 12:57 p.m.
    Hon Members, just a moment. This is an important matter. I will be back for us to carry it to its logical conclusion.
    Meanwhile, the Hon First Deputy Speaker will take the Chair as I see to an important matter for a moment and come back.
    MR FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:59 p.m.
    Hon Ranking Member, please continue.
    Mr Banda 12:59 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it has been submitted that when this L. I. is allowed to pass, it would sin against the Constitution because it would retroactively affect the students holding LLB certificate. My response to this is that, the Supreme Court, in the case of Kpebu v the Attorney-General, adopted the prospective approach. Therefore, this means that in declaring section 96 (7) of the Criminal Procedure Code as unconstitutional, the Supreme Court did not say that all acts founded on section 96 (7) should also be declared invalid.
    In other words, it also means that if any person charged with any of the offences listed under section 96 (7) is refused bail, that person ought not to be granted bail by the mere declaration that section 96 (7) of the Criminal Procedure Code is unconstitutional.
    Mr Speaker, in coming to the conclusion, in the case of Prof. Stephen Kwaku Asare v the Attorney-General, the Supreme Court adopted the same prospective approach by saying that entrance examination and interview were unconstitutional, but this ought not to affect LLB graduates who have gone through the law faculty waiting to enter the law school.
    In the same way, this should not also affect students who have already gone through the entrance examination, or who have been interviewed and are now pursuing legal education. All that the Supreme Court said was that, in a matter of this nature, the prospective approach
    is the best in order to avoid inconvenience, hardship and unfairness.
    Mr Speaker, in concluding, we are not unmindful of the fact that legal education has come of age. The population of Ghana as of 1960 is not the same as it is today. The population has either doubled or tripled. Mr Speaker, the Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice has given an indication that two Bills would soon be presented before Parliament and they would go a long way to cure or take care of the concerns raised by the students.
    Mr Speaker, on the basis of this, I urge all Hon Members to support the Motion in adopting the Report.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Some Hon Members 12:59 p.m.
    No.
    Dr Kwabena Donkor (NDC -- Pru East) 12:59 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I rise to support the recommendation of the Committee. -- [Interruption.] Mr Speaker, in doing so, I would want to address the issues raised by your Committee.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:59 p.m.
    Hon Members, I see that those who are opposed to the application or the Motion are determined not to allow those who are in favour of it to talk. Is that the position?
    Some Hon Members 12:59 p.m.
    Yes.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 12:59 p.m.
    You would not let them be heard. I have heard people argue in this House that oppressors shall “something something” -- [Laughter] That song came from this same side that is oppressing people. This House will resist any oppressor's rule. -- [Laughter.]
    Hon Member, please, continue. He will not be oppressed.
    Dr Donkor 1:07 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, the tradition in this House is that we cannot cure the ills in a substantive Act through subsidiary legislation. Some of us believe that there must be open access to the law schools. This is a fault line in the primary legislation but using subsidiary legislation to cure this is not the right way to go. The right way to go is to have this interim measure in place and then use substantive legislation to cure the ills that we all want to see cured.

    Mr Speaker, on these grounds, I beg to support the Motion.
    Mr Frederick Opare-Ansah (NPP -- Suhum) 1:07 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I came to this House this morning strongly opposed to this Bill. [Hear! Hear!] However, the thought that people should be restricted from getting admission into a certain profession due to lack of resources did not make a lot of sense to me.
    Mr Speaker, if we go to the British Parliament, they have a seating capacity of about 300, but the membership of the
    Mr Frederick Opare-Ansah (NPP -- Suhum) 1:07 a.m.
    House stands at 650. One would usually find a lot of Hon Members sitting in the gallery and some standing around the back benches still conducting Business.

    A similar thing pertains when it comes to the medical school, where students who have attained their due degrees in human biology would not need any additional examination to enter.

    However -- [Interruptions.] As I came in this morning, I also ensured that I had duly read the Report before this House and done the necessary consultations among persons who understand what the issues are. I am now totally convinced. In a moment, I would encourage the back- benchers on both sides of the House to join me in becoming converted to support this particular Motion.

    Mr Speaker, I listened to the Hon Member who moved the Motion --
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:07 a.m.
    Hon Naabu, do you have a point of order? I thought that you have a point of order.
    Mr Naabu 1:07 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity. [Hear! Hear!]
    I hold the Directory of Commonwealth Law Schools, which Ghana is part of --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:07 a.m.
    Hon Naabu, hold on. Are you raising a point of order? If you want to be part of the debate, I would give you the option.
    If it is a point of order, I would listen to it and rule before the Hon Member proceeds. If you want to contribute to the debate, I would give you the opportunity, so hold on.
    Hon Opare-Ansah, please conclude.
    Mr Opare-Ansah 1:07 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, as I implored my Hon Colleagues on both sides of the House to support the adoption of this Report, I would like to draw our attention to paragraph 6.5. In there is a response that the Committee obtained from the Hon Deputy Attorney- General and Deputy Minister for Justice, which indicates clearly that the Hon Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, the Government and everybody admits that there is a problem.
    However, there is a much bigger solution than this current L. I. before the House. All that this L. I. seeks to do is abridge and find an interim solution to enable the Ghana Law School function until this same House is presented with a Bill and does due diligence with it. This would enable the full gamut of the solution to be delivered to prospective law school applicants.
    Mr Speaker, in that regard, I would like to urge my Hon Colleagues in the House, to carefully evaluate the function that we have to execute this morning against the facts that we have. We have all received messages and emails from all over, so we understand the concerns of our electorate.
    However, to ensure that we do not create any vacuums with regard to the operations of the Ghana Law School, I would urge Hon Members from both sides of the House to support the Report of the Committee and adopt same accordingly.
    Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:07 a.m.
    The Leadership of the Minority has given me a list, so I would go by it.
    Hon Inusah Fuseini?
    Alhaji Inusah A. B. Fuseini (NDC -- Tamale Central) 1:07 a.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker, for this opportunity to contribute to the Motion.
    Mr Speaker, I contribute to the Motion based on the Report submitted by your Committee to Parliament, and urge Hon Members of this House to rise up to the occasion and reject the L. I. I do so based on the Report.
    For starters, article 107 of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana forbids Parliament, and not the Supreme Court, to pass a retroactive legislation. What the Regulation seeks to do is legalise an illegality and give it retroactive application.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:07 a.m.
    Hon Member, you and I are lawyers. Could you point to me which law is to be retroactively applied in this case?
    Alhaji Fuseini 1:07 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, article 107 -- [Interruptions.]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:07 a.m.
    Hon Member, I am asking about the L.I. Which specific clause in the L.I. is of retrospective effect?
    Alhaji Fuseini 1:07 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, many L.I.s -- If you would permit me to develop the argument, you would see clearly.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:07 a.m.
    No, you made a statement, which if true, indicts
    -- 1:07 a.m.
    Alhaji Fuseini 1:07 a.m.
    First of all --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:07 a.m.
    Please hold on. You made a statement on the floor of the House that if it is true, it would indict the Committee and the General Legal Council. The House has not approved it yet, and that is why I want you to validate the statement.
    You cannot let it go that it is retroactive, yet, our Committee has recommended it and the General Legal Council has proposed that. If that is true, it is a serious indictment and that is why I would want the specific L. I.
    Alhaji Fuseini 1:07 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, Regulation 12 talks about the appointment of an Independent Examination Committee. This Independent Examination Committee already exists and functions. This Regulation has not yet come into force; meanwhile, there is in existence an Independent Examination Committee.
    If we pass this Regulation, it would give retroactive effect to the existing illegality of the Independent Examination Committee.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:07 a.m.
    If I understand you, that is your understanding of that. That is not a fact. Your understanding is different from mine, so proceed.
    Alhaji Fuseini 1:17 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is my understanding because some students have suffered the consequences of the existence of an illegality.
    Mr Speaker, what we would do today in this House, if we approve of this Bill, would be to legitimise the illegality for students having gone through an examination conducted by an examination board that did not have a legal capacity to do so, and which failed them thereby. [Hear! Hear] --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:17 p.m.
    Hon Chairman, I would give you the right of reply, so please take your seat.
    Alhaji Fuseini 1:17 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, Standing Order 166 (3) says that when a subsidiary legislation is laid before the Committee, they have a criteria.
    Mr Speaker, with your permission, I would want to refer to paragraph 8.3 (a) on page 10 of the Report:
    (a) “whether it is in accordance with the general objects of the Constitution''
    Mr Speaker, I have demonstrated that this cannot be in accordance with the general objectives of the Constitution because the Constitution frowns upon retroactive legislation. So, this cannot be.
    Mr Speaker, with your permission, I would also want to quote paragraph 8.3 (b) in the Report, which says:
    (b) “whether it contains any matter which in the opinion of the Committee should more properly be dealt with in an Act of Parliament;''
    Mr Speaker, the establishment of a Committee is a substantive Body which ought to be dealt with in a substantive legislation and not by a Regulation. It should be by substantive law and not by a Regulation.
    Mr Speaker, the Regulation seeks to establish a Body, which has not been established by the law. What the Regulation would have done, if the Body were established by law, would be to regulate the conduct of that Body through a Legislative Instrument, but not establish
    a Body in a Legislative Instrument and then regulate the Body in that same Instrument. On the basis of paragraph 8.3, there is a fundamental irregularity in this Bill.
    Mr Speaker, we must all understand that the laws of this country are defined in article 11 of the Constitution. With your permission, I quote:
    11. “(1) The laws of Ghana shall comprise -
    (a) this Constitution;
    (b) enactments made by or under the authority of the Parliament established by this Constitution;
    (c) any Orders, Rules and Regulations made by any person or authority under a power conferred by this Constitution;”
    Mr Speaker, this Parliament passed Act 32. In that Act, the power was never given to the GLC to establish an independent examination committee. They were never given the power to conduct examinations for entry into the Ghana Law School.
    Mr Speaker, they assumed that power by themselves and started to perform. The act should be condemned in absolute terms that nobody or authority has the power to vest itself with power -- which this Parliament has not given them -- and then send a strong signal to them that anytime they are interested in assuming power, the course of action to take is to bring it to Parliament.
    Mr Speaker, in paragraph 6.5 in the Report, it is stated that this is an interim measure. This L.I. is a stopgap measure; a permanent solution is in the offing.
    Mr Speaker, the Committee itself said that they are optimistic that there would be a permanent solution. The question to ask is whether this House has speculative jurisdiction. [Interruption.] -- Could we speculate what the Executive would do? [Interruption.] We have no such power, so we cannot rely on optimism whiles an interim stopgap measure. In the final analysis, when that optimism is not fulfilled, we would be left hanging high and dry. [Hear! Hear]
    Mr Speaker, the proper thing to do is to ask them to come holistically. If they intend to amend the Act to provide the basis for what they are doing and open up room for many people who would want to be lawyers, they should bring the amendment of the Act and couple it with their Regulations.
    We would see the general effect of what they intend to do. This is a reasonable House. If it is in sync with the general policy of the government and would afford the betterment of the students and meet their legitimate and realistic expectation, it would be passed. But where they are inviting us to approve of an L. I. that only talks for optimism and potentially violates article 107 of the Constitution and seeks to establish a substantive Body in an L. I., this House should not go along that path. We should not give the GLC an opportunity to, expost facto legalise an illegality they have done for so many years.
    Mr Speaker, finally, this country needs lawyers. The Ghana Law School was established somewhere in the 1960's, at which time there was only one law faculty. Training for admission and direct entrance into the law school was 60 students; 40 LLB and 20 combined. Those who went through the Faculty of Law got automatic entry. At any particular point in time, there
    were not more than 200 students at the Ghana Law School.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:17 p.m.
    Hon Member, in 1984, I entered the law faculty and there were 120 of us. The school said that they had facility to train 60 students. So after the first year, the first 60 students would go. At the law school, we were 60 students -- that figure times two is 120 and not 200. You said that at any point in time, there were over 200 students.
    Alhaji Fusieni 1:17 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I said that there were not more than 200 students.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:17 p.m.
    We were not even up to 120.
    Alhaji Fuseini 1:17 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, Professional Course. Part One had 60 students; Professional Course Part Two had 60 students; Preliminary Course Part One had 40 students and Preliminary Course Part Two had 40 students -- 200 students Course Part at any point in time. [Hear! Hear!]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:17 p.m.
    Hon Member, Preliminary Programme One is not part of the Ghana Law School Course.
    Alhaji Fuseini 1:27 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, exactly. So, when we look at Regulation 1296 -- At the time that the Regulations were passed in 1984, there was the need to train at the law school, students who did not have the benefit of doing law at the University of Ghana then --
    So, they had the opportunity to do the Preliminaries. They took them through the Law of Contracts, Law of Torts and all the requirements under Regulation 1296. That was why they were mandated to regulate and conduct preliminary examinations, intermediate examinations and final examinations.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:27 a.m.
    That answers the questions; 13 more plus one
    —
    Alhaji Fuseini 1:27 a.m.
    Question 14 —
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:27 a.m.
    All right.
    What about the Ghana Law School? How many classrooms have we added?
    Alhaji Fuseini 1:27 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is exactly so. [Interruption.]
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:27 a.m.
    I am not taking part in the debate. I am only asking questions.
    Alhaji Fuseini 1:27 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, that is exactly so. We now have 13 institutions plus one institution at the Faculty of Law, University of Ghana, Legon. What it tells us is that we cannot use the same model that we used in 1960 to solve the problem that has been created in 2018. That is simply what it means; that we should not allow the Ghana School of Law to be steamed in the past. They need reforms.
    Mr Speaker, we all have to be able to convince our brothers and sisters who want to get professional legal education that the opportunities exist. Indeed, article 25 of the Constitution enjoins the Government and all of us to create opportunities for people who would want to take advantage of tertiary education. Limiting the number of students who would enter the law school and be trained as lawyers is to give a narrow
    interpretation to article 25, by constricting and restricting access into the Ghana School of Law.
    Indeed, do we even need the Ghana School of Law to be able to train lawyers in this country? I say, no, we do not. This is because we have universities and there are courses of instructions. All these courses could be taught at the various faculties of the various universities, and an examination administered to all students who want to be lawyers. Thereby, the General Legal Council would regulate internship for them to be called to the Bar, and this could be done.
    Mr Kwasi Ameyaw-Cheremeh (NPP —Sunyani East) 1:27 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to support the Motion to adopt the Report of the Subsidiary Legislation Committee by their recommendation to the House in respect of the Legal Profession (Professional and Post-Call Law Course) Regulations, 2018
    (L.I. 2355).
    Mr Speaker, I wish to underscore that in debating this matter, we need to distinguish moral arguments from legal and constitutional arguments. It is a fact that the faculties are turning out so many students who need to undertake professional law training. So, if people have fellow-feeling for students who do neither have access to professional law training, they might be legitimate. That is not a legal nor constitutional issue. Therefore, we must anchor our contributions and debate on what the
    Constitution requires of us and what the law also requires of us.
    Mr Speaker, my Hon Colleague, the Hon Member for Tamale Central, has spoken elaborately about the retroactivity of the Instrument. I do not see any retroactivity in this Instrument.
    Mr Speaker, a law is said to be retroactive if the effect is backdated — it takes effect from years back. But this Instrument is prospective in nature. It is prospective in the sense that the examinations to be conducted would be in the future; it is not to regularise examinations in the past. There is no provision in the Instrument to indicate that when this Instrument passes, it would regularise anything done in the past. Probably, he alluded to retroactivity because of paragraph 7.4 on page 8 of the Report of the Committee; but it is very clear in the face of it.
    Mr Speaker, with your kind permission, I read 1:37 p.m.
    “The Committee also observed that prior to the introduction of L. I. 2355, the GLC had instituted an Independent Examination Board (IEB) to administer examinations for admission into the Ghana School of Law and the examinations for qualification for enrolment to the Ghana Bar among others. The Committee took note that the Council was not clothed with the authority to establish a Board.”
    Mr Speaker, so the Committee makes a definitive statement regarding the Board, but it went on to state, and I beg to continue:
    “Consequently, L.I. 2355 seeks to establish an Independent Exami- nations Committee (IEC)…”
    Mr Speaker, an Independent Examinations Board is not the same as Independent Examinations Committee. I believe my Hon Brother there is confusing the two things. It goes on to say, and I beg to read:
    “Consequently, L.I. 2355 seeks to establish an Independent Examinations Committee (IEC) to perform the same function of the IEB. The IEC, therefore, becomes one of the Committees of the GLC.”
    It is a committee of the General Legal Council. Does the Act say that the General Legal Council cannot establish committees? Could they not establish committees? So, if the General Legal Council establishes a committee under this Instrument and we say it is retrospective, what is retrospective about it? I do not see any retrospectivity in respect of this Regulation.
    Mr Speaker, the Committee did a very good work. They did wide consultations; they offered opportunities to representatives of law students. In fact, they were represented by the presidents of the various Law Students Associations.

    They submitted memoranda and even put in personal appearance to explain their position on the Instrument to the Committee. The General Legal Council itself appeared before the Committee, the Ghana School of Law and the various faculties and individuals who had interest in this matter and submitted memoranda and also appeared before the Committee to forcefully argue their positions.

    Mr Speaker, the Report that is before the House is a unanimous one. When we talk about the unanimity of the Report, it is both sides -- this side and that side.
    Mr Speaker, with your kind permission, I read 1:37 p.m.


    They cannot resign from it. It is a Committee of Parliament that has done a very good work and reported to us; everybody on the Committee agrees with this. So, we must put that on record as the Hon Chairman of the Committee said.

    Mr Speaker, the entrance examination that the General Legal Council seeks to conduct to admit students into the Ghana School of Law does not infringe any law, rule and order. As the Hon Chairman of the Committee put it across to us, Order 166 (3) defines the remit of the Subsidiary Legislation Committee. It tells what is a subordinate law and the requirements of a subordinate law. None of the issues listed there has been compromised by L. I. 2355. Therefore, I urge the House to overwhelmingly endorse L.I. 2355 by adopting the Report of the Committee.
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:37 p.m.
    Hon Vice Chairman of the Committee, I know you would want to contribute; but your side has given me a list of people I should call, which does not include you. So, regrettably, I would have to call somebody else other than you.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:37 p.m.
    I would have to call Hon Dominic Ayine.
    Dr Dominic A. Ayine (NDC -- Bolgatanga East) 1:37 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it is with a very heavy heart that I rise to oppose the adoption of the Report of the Committee.
    I say so because in my capacity as former Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice, in the year 2015, a Bill was submitted to the Attorney-
    General's Department by the General Legal Council for passage into law. I reviewed that Bill and sent it back for policy reasons because it did not sufficiently address the challenges of professional legal education. I expected that Bill would have been reformulated and submitted in order to address the existing challenge.
    That did not happen before I left office.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to make two substantive points regarding this Legislative Instrument. The first one is that we would have to take, very seriously, the point that Hon Inusah Fuseini has raised regarding retroactivity.
    Retroactivity takes two forms; it could take the form of a patent provision on the face of the legislation, which is retroactive in character. It could also take the form of retroactivity, which is necessarily implied because of what the legislation or subsidiary piece of legislation is designed to achieve.
    Mr Speaker, in this particular case, as at the time the examinations were institutionalised, there were students who were qualified under Act 32 and under L.I. 1296 to enter the Ghana School of Law without writing an examination. Those students were deprived of access to legal education as a result of the application of the examination criteria. At the time, they had a due right, which was taken away from them unconstitutionally and illegally by the General Legal Council.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:37 p.m.
    Hon Member, at the time were you Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice? You observed that it was unconstitutional and illegal. [Laughter.]
    Dr Ayine 1:37 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, going by the Standing Orders, I have no right to reply in contrariwise to what Mr Speaker has said. [Laughter.]
    Mr Speaker, however, I had the occasion to address the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) on this matter, in the year 2015, and I pointed out to the Conference of the GBA that what was happening in the system was illegal. That was what I said, and Hon Members could go back to read the speech that I delivered -- it has been published.
    Mr Speaker, so I believe we have to take the issue of retroactivity very seriously because this House cannot be seen to be violating the Constitution by adopting a Legislative Instrument that has retroactive effect in terms of endorsing the taking away of the rights of students.
    Therefore, we have to go slow in terms of our decision to adopt or not to adopt this L.I.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Majority Chief Whip, Mr Ameyaw-Cheremeh, said something here about the distinction between an Interim Examination Board and then an Interim Examination Committee. I am sure you remember your first-year lessons in legal systems, where it was said that the forms of action we have, have been buried, yet they rule us from their grave.
    The distinction that he drew was a distinction between form and substance. The Interim Examination Committee performs exactly the same functions as the Interim Examination Board.
    rose
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:37 p.m.
    Hon Member, you would hold on.
    Yes, Hon Member for Suhum?
    Mr Opare-Ansah 1:37 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Member keeps referring to an Interim Examination Board and an Interim Examination Committee. The Hon Majority
    Chief Whip never said “Interim”; he said “Independent”. That is what is contained in the Report, so, if the Hon Member would advert his mind to using the proper terminology.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:37 p.m.
    Hon Member?
    Dr Ayine 1:47 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you.
    Mr Speaker, I actually meant to say the Independent Examinations Board. Basically, the functions performed today or to be performed by the Independent Examination Committee in substance and in all respect are the same as the functions to be performed by the Independent Examination Committee. So, basically, what we are doing is endorsing the illegality or unconstitutionality that was declared by the Supreme Court.
    Mr Speaker, the other thing I have to say is that under Act 32, there is a duty imposed upon the General Legal Council to make arrangements for the admission of students. The imposition of that duty means that there is a correlative right on the part of the students in terms of the arrangements that would be made by the General Legal Council. I wish to submit that the arrangement that is being made, which we are about to endorse in this House -- [Interruption] -- or not to endorse in this House -- [Laughter] -- does not sufficiently address the challenges of access to legal education.
    Mr Speaker, under article 25 of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, there is a right to equal opportunity. That right is being violated on a continuous basis by the arrangements that the General Legal Council has made and intends to make through the passage of this L. I.
    Mr Speaker, when we have a situation where paragraph 7.2 of your Committee's own Report, and with your permission, I read:
    Dr Ayine 1:47 p.m.


    “The GLC informed the Committee that, the Ghana School of Law intended to admit six hundred (600), for the 2017/2018 academic year. One thousand, two hundred and thirty (1,230) students sat for the entrance examination in July, 2017. Out of that number, only three hundred and sixty eight (368) students obtained the fifty per cent pass mark.”

    Mr Speaker, because the GLC failed to provide access to address the challenges, these are some of the things that would happen. The mass failure which is captured in this Report is what would happen.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:47 p.m.
    Sorry, Hon Member, could you express further -- I do not get the linkage.
    Dr Ayine 1:47 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, basically, what I would want to say is that because the GLC has not made provision for expanded access, they are deliberately keeping down the numbers in order to make sure that they are able to absorb the numbers that they admit. I say this because - [Interruption.] Mr Speaker, please indulge me.
    The reason I say this is that, I cannot believe that a student taught by my former professors, a student who has been passed by Professor Kumado, Professor Mensa-Bonsu -- A student who has been passed by my former professors cannot pass that examination. It is not true and it cannot be true -- [Laughter.] So, I say that because they do not have the space, they are deliberately and artificially keeping down the numbers in order to be able to manage.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:47 p.m.
    Hon Member, do you have any basis for saying the Report is not true? [Interruption.] You
    are challenging a fact put out by the GLC. Is there any basis for challenging those facts?
    Dr Ayine 1:47 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, there is a historical basis for it.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:47 p.m.
    Historical basis?
    Dr Ayine 1:47 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker. Since they started this process, we have a cohort of over 3000 students roaming the streets.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:47 p.m.
    That is not the issue. They said that out of the 1,230 students who wrote the examinations, only 368 got 50 per cent.
    Is that the fact you are disputing? If it is, I would want to know the basis, because this is the information that has been put before a Committee. It has been accepted and put in a Report to the House. If you want to challenge that you must have some basis.
    Dr Ayine 1:47 p.m.
    That is so. Mr Speaker, I would do so based upon my own experience for 13 years as a lecturer at the Faculty of Law, and based upon my own knowledge of what is happening.
    I was a member of the GLC and a member of the Board of Legal Education. If we go back to the minutes of meetings, we would see that I dissented each step of the way.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:47 p.m.
    Hon Member, we are talking about facts concerning an examination.
    Dr Ayine 1:47 p.m.
    Yes, Mr Speaker.
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:47 p.m.
    Hon Member, does the GLC conduct the examination itself? Did the Council you were a part of ever conduct an examination?
    Dr Ayine 1:47 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the GLC --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:47 p.m.
    Hon Member, please hold on. Hon Member, whatever objections you have, I would not let facts which cannot be verified go into the record. When you say things about the GLC, which supervised you and I and signed our certificates. If you put in the record that they are putting out misinformation, it should not be in the records without basis.
    My certificate is signed by the GLC as much as yours, so you should be factual.
    rose
    Dr Ayine 1:47 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I am --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:47 p.m.
    Hon Member, hold on. Hon Member for Suhum, what is your objection?
    Mr Opare-Ansah 1:47 p.m.
    On a point of order.
    Mr Speaker, I come under Order 93 (2) and with your permission, I quote 1:47 p.m.
    “It shall be out of order to use offensive, abusive, insulting, blasphemous or unbecoming words or to impute improper motives to any other Member or to make personal allusions.”

    Mr Speaker, the Hon Member on his feet indicated that the GLC is intentionally instituting this examination to limit the intake. The motive for which these examinations are carried out are clear from the stated reasons of the GLC.

    I hear some Hon Members shouting who is a Member. Mr Speaker, in parliamentary practice, things that we do not do to one another here, it is even worse when we do it to people or institutions who are not present here to defend themselves. That is why in our

    practice, when somebody is not here to defend himself or herself, ordinarily, we would not even refer to them. So, to impute that the motives for conducting examination by the GLC is nothing but a mere --
    Mr First Deputy Speaker 1:47 p.m.
    Hon Member, hold on. Mr Speaker would resume the seat -- [Uproar!]
    MR SPEAKER
    Mr Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    Hon Member, continue
    Mr Opare-Ansah 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I was in the process of --
    Mr Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    Hon Member, conclude, I was listening. [Laughter.]
    Mr Opare-Ansah 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Member for Bolgatanga was imputing improper motives to the GLC and its Board that conduct examinations. In his view, there are students whom his professors have passed and for that matter, he could not see how they would, in his words, “fail that examination”.
    Mr Speaker, I have seen people who pass examinations conducted by very serious institutions and go on to fail even smaller and minor examinations. I believe the statement he made with regard to the GLC is in bad taste and he must withdraw and apologise to them.
    Mr Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    Hon Minority Leadership, is the number here exhausted, so that we move on to Leadership? [Interruption.]
    Are we on Leadership at this stage?
    Mr Avedzi 1:54 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, no. An Hon Member was speaking before the point of order was raised. So, we should allow the Hon Member to continue.
    Mr Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    I beg your pardon?
    Mr Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    Hon Ayariga, Chairman of the Committee?
    Mr Avedzi 1:54 p.m.
    No, Dr Ayine. [Uproar!]
    Mr Speaker 1:54 p.m.
    Order! Hon Majority Leader, does that conclude everything? [Interruption.]
    Hon Members, this is a very simple matter.
    Do we have the full complement on each side at this stage?
    Mr Opare-Ansah 1:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the Hon Member was on his feet and I raised the point of order against him.
    Mr Speaker 1:57 p.m.
    Very well. Hon Member, you may conclude.
    Dr Ayine 1:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, in God's name, I beg you not to give me five minutes. [Laughter.] I have made the point that the duty, which is a statutory duty, imposed upon the General Legal Council (GLC), confers correlative rights on students or holders of the LLB degree.
    Mr Speaker, I submit before this House, that, that duty has not been exercised in conformity with the ethics of the Constitution, especially in terms of article 23 of the Constitution.
    That the GLC and the Board of Legal Education have not acted consistently in a fair and reasonable manner in addressing the challenges facing education in this country, especially professional legal education.
    The right to equal opportunity under the Constitution, specifically article 25, is not being upheld by the actions that are taken by the GLC and the Board of Legal Education. On that basis, I submit and urge Hon Members of this august House to throw out the L.I. which seeks to legalise what is otherwise an unconstitutional legal Act.
    rose
    Mr Speaker 1:57 p.m.
    Very soon, you will know why the Hon Member is on his feet. Hon Member, what is the issue?
    Mr Banda 1:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, this is just to --
    Mr Speaker 1:57 p.m.
    Hon Member, I just want you to first satisfy me that there is justification for you to be on your feet.
    Mr Banda 1:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I duly seconded the Motion.
    Mr Speaker 1:57 p.m.
    You being?
    Mr Banda 1:57 p.m.
    I seconded the Motion.
    Mr Speaker 1:57 p.m.
    Yes?
    Mr Banda 1:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I seconded the Motion and having listened to the presentation from my Hon Colleagues, I would like to seek your indulgence to make a few reactions. [Uproar!] --
    Mr Speaker 1:57 p.m.
    Hon Member, you know that is not our practice. You may give your views to the one who will conclude. It is just like a normal debate, and I do not think it spoils anything, unless it becomes rather many and everybody else would have to give some good reason --
    I would want that we come to the Leaders. Even in school debates, when
    you have a point, at that conclusion stage, you pass it on to the principal speaker. Therefore, I would want the Leaders, at this stage, to please give us all the good arguments as they think fit and then we would wind this matter up.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, respectfully, the Hon Ben Abdallah Banda seconded the Motion, and at this stage, the rules allow him to come back. Unless, maybe, you give an indication to us that we have had enough so the Leadership should conclude.
    In any event, we gave ourselves three Hon Members from each side. We have had three from the other side and two from here.
    Mr Speaker 1:57 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, the rules allow him to come back if Mr Speaker allows. [Hear! Hear!] I want these things to be very clear. In all the circumstances of proceedings, Mr Speaker can decide that it is not necessary for him to come back, and I have shown you the way out by way of whatever good points he has. In fact, when the Leaders conclude, I have concluded.
    So, I would plead, let us make progress and let the Hon Leaders conclude at this stage. I know they are very competent to encompass all possible arguments.
    Hon Minority Leadership?
    rose
    Mr Speaker 1:57 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, do you want to start?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, no. Except to note and indeed, stress that in the course of the debate we have had three Hon Members who spoke from the
    Minority side and two from the Majority side.
    Mr Speaker 1:57 p.m.
    Yes, that is why I asked early on --
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 1:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I will bow to the Chair. The Leaders can conclude.
    Mr Speaker 1:57 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, do not worry. That is why I asked if both sides have been satisfied. If we took two Hon Members here, and three there, it is a good reason why you should be allowed.
    Hon Member, you may go on.
    Mr Banda 1:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you. The Hon (Alhaji) Inusah Fuseini, in his submission --
    Mr Speaker 1:57 p.m.
    Hon Members, in view of the time and the Business before us, Sitting is extended beyond the regular hours.
    Mr Banda 1:57 p.m.
    The Hon (Alhaji) Inusah Fusieni did allude to the fact that the Independent Examination Committee, which is being established in the L.I., is unlawful, to the extent that same is not borne out by the Legal Profession Act, 1960 (Act 32).
    Mr Speaker 1:57 p.m.
    Hon Members, Order!
    Mr Banda 1:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, section 13 of the Legal Profession Act says and with your permission, I read:
    “It shall be the duty of the General Legal Council to make arrangements…
    My emphasis is on “to make arrangements”. “To make arrangements” presupposes that the General Legal Council has the mandate to establish a body or a Committee to which, an Independent
    Mr Banda 2:07 p.m.
    Examination Committee, to do among other things, regulate and conduct examination in order to regulate the admission of students to pursue courses of instruction leading to qualification as lawyers. This mandate is either expressed or implied.
    Mr Speaker, again, he did allude to the fact that the L.I is intended to legitimise what is otherwise unconstitutional or unlawful, in that once the Supreme Court declared that the independent examination body was unlawful, this L.I. cannot purport to legitimise an independent examination body.
    The response is simple; the response states that once the Supreme Court did say that an examination body has not been legitimised by an L.I, it does not necessarily mean that now, an L.I. cannot be passed to establish an independent examination body, whose mandate would be, among other things, to conduct examinations in order to regulate entry of students into the Ghana Law School.

    Mr Speaker, on the issue of this L. I. having a retroactive effect -- the Supreme Court made it clear that if it intended to interpret the provisions of the law, strictly speaking, then what it would mean is that all the students who went to the Ghana Law School after they have passed the entrance examinations and were interviewed would be withdrawn. This is because all acts that were founded on the conduct of the entrance examinations and the conduct of the interview would have been declared unconstitutional.

    Mr Speaker, but the Supreme Court, in making a determination, said that if it came to this conclusion, then what it would mean is that chaos, unfairness, injustice

    and a lot of inconvenience would be occasioned. Therefore, students who are currently in the Ghana Law School and those who gained entry into the school through the conduct of the entrance examinations and the interview ought to remain in the school.

    Mr Speaker, in the same way and by necessary implications, it means that the judgment of the Supreme Court said that the General Legal Council has the mandate to bring an L.I. before Parliament to legitimise what had otherwise been declared unconstitutional; to wit, either to legitimise the conduct of an entrance examination or to legitimise the conduct of an interview.

    Mr Speaker, but the Committee as well as the petitioners, having come to the realisation that the conduct of an examination and interview would be too heavy on the law students, came to the conclusion that we should delete the portion which relates to the conduct of the interview, but we should not touch the portion which relates to the conduct of the entrance examination.

    Mr Speaker, to the best of my knowledge and understanding of the law, it does not derogate from Act 32, which is the Legal Profession Act, 1960.

    Mr Speaker, so in a nutshell, what I want to say is that the conduct of the entrance examination does not derogate from the enabling Act, which is the Legal Profession Act, 1960 (Act 32).

    Mr Speaker, I thank you.
    Mr Speaker 2:07 p.m.
    Hon Member, thank you very much.
    Minority Leadership?
    Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka (NDC -- Asawase) 2:07 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, thank you -- [Interruption.]
    rose
    Mr Speaker 2:07 p.m.
    Hon Ayariga, do you have any point at this stage?
    Mr Ayariga 2:07 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I want a direction from you; as the Hon Chairman, would I be permitted to conclude on the matter?
    Mr Speaker 2:07 p.m.
    Do we have that concluding statements?
    Mr Ayariga 2:07 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, you would recall that when I presented the Report, I was restricted to the terms of the Report, and I was told that I could not go outside the confines of the terms of the Report. Mr Speaker, pursuant to the Report that I have laid before the House, many issues have been raised; questions of constitutionality and so on have been raised so it is only fair that, as the Hon Chairman of the Committee, I would be given an opportunity to respond to the issues of constitutionality, legality, propriety et cetera in order that this House would be well informed to conclude and be able to take a decision on the matter.
    Mr Speaker 2:07 p.m.
    Hon Ayariga, I am only thinking whether you would come in after the Hon Leaders or --
    But as the Hon Chairman of the Committee, we all know that it is our practice to allow the Hon Chairman to make concluding remarks. So, he will make the concluding remarks. I only seek guidance on whether it would be before or after the Hon Leaders. I think we would leave the last words to the Hon Leaders. So, you may make your concluding remarks.
    Mr Ayariga 2:07 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, it would not be proper for me that, after my Hon Leader has spoken, I would get up and contradict him. It would be better if I say what I have to say now, so that when the Hon Leader contradicts me --
    Mr Speaker 2:07 p.m.
    Hon Member, please you have five minutes to make your statements.
    Mr Ayariga 2:07 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I think that the number of issues that have been raised are all very important. Mr Speaker, one is the retroactivity, legality, constitutionality and unconstitutionality. Mr Speaker, it is true that what happened was clearly unconstitutional; the Supreme Court declared that it was unconstitutional.
    Mr Speaker, but those who say that this House is passing a retroactive legislation to legalise an unconstitutional conduct should be guided by the decision of the Supreme Court.
    Mr Speaker, this issue was actually pressed on the Supreme Court and they said that they think that the path of prospectivity would better serve the needs of justice as we are authorised to do by article 22 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court concluded and I beg to quote:
    “By virtue of and in accordance with article 2, subclause (2) of the Constitution, it is hereby ordered that the Council puts in place a mechanism that would enable it to make changes to L. I. 1296 in terms of what it thinks appropriate in order to properly exercise its mandate under Act 32 having regard in particular to sections 1, 13 and 14 by putting in place a system of legal education in terms of Articles 11 (7) and 297 of the Constitution as preparation towards admission in October 2017 have already been initiated and bearing in mind that persons who would avail themselves of such opportunities are qualified within the scope of Regulations 2 and 3 as pronounced in this judgement. We do not think
    Mr Speaker, section 13 (2) says and with your permission, I beg to quote 2:17 p.m.
    “The Council may carry out the arrangements in the manner that it thinks fit and in particular through a school of law set up by the Council or through any other educational institution.”
    Mr Speaker, this is one of the requirements. Also, if you read the provisions, it says that the LLB degree that one should have must be an LLB degree awarded by the University of Ghana or some other institutions recognised by the General Legal Council. As we speak, there are only three institutions that the General Legal Council has entered into agreement with that generates law students for the General Legal Council. All the other ten that produce LLB holders, who are permitted to write the examination, strictly speaking, if we are to go according to the law, they would not even qualify to sit for the examination.
    Mr Speaker, Hon Members who are pressing the argument of legality should take their time and read the legislation, read the Supreme Court decision and they would understand the import of this very simple amendment that the Supreme Court has directed, which we are pressing on Hon Members to approve for the Supreme Court.
    Mr Speaker 2:17 p.m.
    Hon Member, thank you very much.
    Mr Ayariga 2:17 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, let me conclude by saying that we have a practical problem. We have about 2,000 people with LLB degrees who would want to come to the Ghana Law School. The Ghana Law School has space for 500 people. The question is, practically, how does one determine how to select the 500 people?
    It would be ideal if we bring the Appropriation Act that we passed and delete the provisions where we have approved GH600 million for Nation's Builder's Corps and redirect it to the Ghana Law School for them to build a new law school so that there could be more space. We could bring the GH¢700 million for the Planting for Food and Jobs Project and redirect it to the Ghana Law School. But to the extent that we have not made such provisions yet, the Ghana Law School is basically constrained. They have space for only 500 people.
    Mr Speaker 2:17 p.m.
    Thank you very much.
    The Leaders would make their concluding remarks. For the avoidance of doubt, you have 15 minutes each.
    Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka (NDC -- Asawase) 2:17 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker, I rise to urge Hon Colleagues to oppose the passage of this Regulations today. The simple reason is this; beyond reasonable doubt, we all have agreed that the main problem to deal with legal education in Ghana has to do with the amendment of Act 32. There is no contention. With those for and against the Motion, everybody agreed that this is where we needed to do a lot of work to be able to deal with the problem.
    Mr Speaker, if you look at today's Business Statement, on page 3, item
    numbered (iv), — Presentation and First Reading of Bills, the Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill, 2018. This means, God willing, next week, this Bill would be laid for us to go through the deliberation.
    Mr Speaker, we are simply putting the cart before the horse, because if we have this Bill before the House -- And with your permission, I quote Standing Order 95 (1) of the House. It says that:
    “It shall be out of order to anticipate a Bill by discussion of a motion dealing with the subject matter of the Bill on a day prior to that appointed for the consideration of that Bill.”
    Mr Speaker, you could see clearly that we have a Bill before the House, and we are now having a discussion to approve a Regulation that would be put ahead of this. If by the will of God this Bill goes through all the stages and it is passed into an Act and there are inconsistencies between the Act and this Regulation, it would mean this House would have to come back again to redo the Regulation.
    Mr Speaker, let me say this; we should not allow the General Legal Council to pluck the hanging fruit. They should be able to think outside the box. Challenges are supposed to be confronted and dealt with.
    Mr Speaker, if you look at the Regulations, which is currently under operation by the General Legal Council, and specifically, if you look at the section that says that one cannot operate --
    Yes, Mr Speaker, it is here. section 2(b) says that:
    “A person shall qualify for admission to the Professional Legal Course at the Ghana Law School if --
    rose
    Mr Speaker 2:17 p.m.
    Hon Member, at this stage, if you have any views, you might convey them to your Leader who would also respond.
    Hon Minority Chief Whip, please continue.
    Mr Hammond 2:17 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I take the view that he is misleading the House.
    Alhaji Muntaka 2:17 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, if you take the Regulatory Bodies Act, (Act 857), on page 18, for somebody to qualify to be
    a medical doctor in this country, this is how the regulatory body does it --
    On qualification for registration -- A person does not qualify to be registered as a medical or dental practitioner, physician assistant or a certified registered nurse unless that person --
    (a)Holds a primary qualification from an institution recognised by the Council; and
    (b)Passes or is exempted from the prescribed examination conducted by the Council.
    Mr Speaker, they do not wait for the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST) or the University of Ghana or the University of Cape Coast, or the University for Development Studies to train somebody in human biology. When the person want to do clinical, then they step in and say they should come to the school they have created.
    Mr Speaker, they allow those institutions — they monitor and ensure that the mortuary and other facilities — For example, the KNUST must team up with the Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital (KATH) to do the clinical; the Medical and Dental Council only does regulation.
    Mr Speaker, when you take the Nursing and Midwifery Council, it is the same thing that they do. They do not say that the nurses and the midwives should come and attend a school that they have created, where they would re-examine them for the practical studies. They rather supervise these schools and ensure that the schools have the minimum facilities to train the nurses; and when they are done, they write the Licence “A” examination.
    Mr Speaker, we have the same thing with the Pharmacy Council. The Pharmacy Council does not have a school where a pharmacist, after he has gone through the first degree, would go do the practical training with them.
    They rather ensure that all schools that want to train pharmacists must have the laboratories and facilities to be able to train pharmacists, and then when they are done, they write the exams.
    Mr Speaker, let me say on record that no Commonwealth country in this world Ghana included, is doing what we are about to approve for the General Legal Council to do --
    Mr Speaker 2:27 p.m.
    Hon Minority Chief Whip, “no other country in the Commonwealth is doing what we are about to do”? Please, make yourself very clear. In England, you may have a first class honours from the Oxford University but you still have to fight for a place in law school. The two are different. A degree would not necessarily make you a lawyer. You would still, with your first class honours from the Cambridge University have to pass a qualifying examination, compete and get a place in the Inns of Court and then get the Bar, which is the BL and become a lawyer.
    Make yourself very clear, Hon Member.
    Alhaji Muntaka 2:27 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, the law school in England does not require people to write examinations to enter it. There is a separate institution that does that and I stand corrected. It is not the law school that does the training.
    rose
    Mr Speaker 2:27 p.m.
    Hon Member, I was avoiding Hon Hammond for a good reason of non-interruption of Leaders as they conclude. Nevertheless, at this juncture, I see him rise again as Hon Muntaka, you apparently insist on your point. Knowing his status at the English Bar, I am bound to ask him to speak, whether or not it is on a Point of Order to what you are saying.
    Mr Hammond 2:27 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, you are entirely right.
    Mr Speaker, as of yesterday, those who are seeking admission to enter the Bar of the United Kingdom -- actually, England and Wales -- are to write an entrance examination, which is computer-based.
    Mr Speaker, my Hon Colleagues who are not entirely legally minded should be careful about this matter -- [Uproar] --
    Mr Speaker, in England, there is a split in the profession. We have the solicitors and the barristers. In Ghana, we do not have that split; it is combined. It does not make any difference. Those who seek to become lawyers, solicitors or barristers in Ghana, in the end, when they qualify, have some facilities to enable them practise in England, if they are able to qualify within certain angles. It makes no difference at all.
    Mr Speaker, when we talk about the solicitor wing of England, again, there is another entrance examination.
    Mr Speaker, people should talk about matters they have adequate knowledge about.
    Mr Speaker, you gave me the opportunity to respond to just this one, but as I said, my own daughter is seeking admission to the Bar and she has to go through the same procedure that people seek to go through in this country.
    Mr Speaker 2:27 p.m.
    Hon Muntaka, you may proceed.
    Alhaji Muntaka 2:27 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, nobody is disputing the fact that for one to become a lawyer, he has to write the Bar examinations. I have just said that this Act that we have passed --
    Before one becomes a medical doctor, after the training for the Medical and Dental Council, Nursing and Midwifery Council, Pharmacy Council -- one has to write the exams to qualify as such.
    Mr Speaker, what I am saying is that, the nature of examinations that are written today are not even well-known to those who write them. And I am sorry to say that if today, we have to even get our judges at the Superior Court to write such examinations, because of the way they are structured, it is possible we could have a practising judge fail. This is because when we have the General Certificate Ordinary Level (‘O' Level) and the General Certificate Advanced Level (‘A' Level) and the West African Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE), when we go to the (WAEC) website, there is a chief examiner's report; there is a syllabus and there is a marking scheme and something to guide anybody who wants to write the examinations. Can we say same of this examinations that they are asking people to write?
    Mr Speaker, with the greatest respect, no.
    Mr Speaker, what I am saying, which is very instructive is that, looking at our Constitution, article 107 (b) says and, with your permission, I quote:
    “Parliament shall have no power to pass any law --
    (b) which operates retrospectively to impose any limitations on or to adversely affect the personal rights and liberties of any person or to impose a burden, obligation
    or liability on any person except in the case of a law enacted under articles 178 to 182 of this Constitution.”
    Mr Speaker, when these students were going to do the LLB, it was not part of the requirements that when they finish the LLB, they would have to write some other examination. Today, we are going to promulgate a law that would take retrospective effect on somebody who has finished law school since 2012 and has been struggling to enter the Ghana Law School. When he was starting the Ghana legal education as a young prospective secondary school graduate, it was not part of his contract that he would be writing an examination. What do you say to this?
    Mr Speaker, if we look at the rules of the House, specifically, Order 166, which the Subsidiary Legislation Committee used in working -- I would just quote 166 (3) (b) with your permission;
    “whether it contains any matter which in the opinion of the Committee should more properly be dealt with in an Act of Parliament”.
    Mr Speaker, nowhere in the current Act that we are talking about, that is Act 32, have they been given the power to set up an independent committee to look at examinations. The only committee that they have been asked to set up is a disciplinary committee. That is the only one.
    Mr Speaker, now we have Regulations that we are setting up, giving them the mandate to set up an independent examination committee.
    Mr Speaker, to set up a committee is a substantive issue that has to be in the Act. It should be in the Act. It does not find expression in the main Act, yet we are running to give them the liberty to be able to create this.
    Mr Speaker, I would want to urge that they are claiming that they cannot do admissions if this does not pass because they need it as an interim measure.
    Mr Speaker, admission is in September/ October. With the greatest respect, next week, the Bill would be laid and we have up to the end of March to deal with it. If we are not done in May, we could deal with it when we come back. In June and July, we could deal with it so that we would be able to set what we want the legal education in this country to be.
    But Mr Speaker, let me say that in this House, when you wanted all of us to pick Special Assistants, I remember your words that the person must have a Master's degree, if not, the person should have a first degree -- first class or second class upper -- We said that some could have second class lower but you said no, we should not take people with second class lower.
    Mr Speaker, of the LLB students that have passed and want to go and read law, there are first class students among them; there are second class upper students among them. So, if you say that if we do not give you this you do not have any basis, I disagree with that.
    Mr Speaker, with the greatest respect, I do not need my O'Level results anymore. I needed my O'Level results to do A'Level, so, the moment I complete ‘O' Level and I pass well and I get the ‘A'level, I do not need the ‘O'level --
    2. 37 p. m.
    Mr Speaker 2:27 p.m.
    And in conclusion?
    Alhaji Muntaka 2:27 p.m.
    The same applies to entering the University with the ‘A' level.
    Mr Speaker 2:27 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader?
    Majority Leader/Minister for Parliamentary Affairs (Mr Osei Kyei- Mensah-Bonsu) 2:27 p.m.
    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker, I think from the very onset, it is important to know and indeed address our minds to Order 95 that my Hon Colleague, the Minority Chief Whip brought to our attention, and to state emphatically that Order 95 (2) does not arise here at all.
    Mr Speaker, he says to us that and I beg to quote 2:27 p.m.
    “It shall be out of order to anticipate a Bill by discussion of a motion dealing with the subject matter of the Bill on a day prior to that appointed for the consideration of that Bill”.
    Mr Speaker, which Motion is before us here? So, clearly, it does not apply.
    Mr Speaker, the issues that have been raised are really germane to where we are as a country and we should really address the substance of the matter.
    It explains the reason why when we had this brouhaha, I drew the attention of the Hon Chairman of the Committee to the fact that where we are, we should find space to engage the General Legal Council, the students, the Attorney- General and the Ghana Law School, among others.
    Mr Speaker, in considering this matter, I would beg to submit that it is not a matter of pandering to sentimentality. We should not be dogmatic about it.
    We are not here for sentiments. We are here to consider whether or not, per the remit of the Subsidiary Legislation Committee as expressed in Order 166, anything is found wanting. That is our concern.
    Mr Speaker, as per the Report of the Committee, there is nothing untoward -- and the Hon Nii Lantey Vanderpuye is asking how? -- That is the Report. He should please read the Report; he has not read the Report.
    Mr Speaker, I know there are many among us who are pursuing a course in law -- [Laughter] -- There are many of them at Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA) and MountCrest University College; we should not be swayed by their sentiments at all.
    Mr Speaker, our attention has been drawn to article 25 of the Constitution, which talks about affording access to tertiary education.
    Mr Speaker, with your permission, let me read what is contained in article 25. Article 25(1) (c), which is relevant, provides:
    “All persons shall have the right to equal educational opportunities and facilities and with a view to achieving the full realisation of that right --
    (c) higher education shall be made equally accessible to all, on the basis of capacity…”
    Mr Speaker, that is the operative word.
    It is and I beg to quote:
    “…on the basis of capacity by every appropriate means, and in particular, by progressive introduction of free education”.
    Mr Speaker, the operative word is “capacity”. The capacity is on two accounts; the capacity of the institution and the capacity of the individual. You cannot just stress that education is a right; everybody should be accorded access.
    Mr Speaker, the Constitution draws attention to capacity. Why is it that those who are arguing are not drawing attention to capacity? It is not mere access; it dwells on capacity.
    Why for convenience are they not quoting capacity? Capacity on the
    account of the institution and the individual as well as the examination determines the capacity of the individual in this regard.
    Mr Speaker, that is why I said we should not be sentimental. We should not be dogmatic.
    Mr Speaker, article 11 (7) of the Constitution provides; and I beg to quote:
    “Any Order, Rule or Regulation made by a person or authority under a power conferred by this Constitution or any other law shall --
    (a) be laid in Parliament;
    (b) be published in the Gazette on the day it is laid before Parliament; and
    (c) come into force at the expiration of twenty-one sitting days after being so laid unless Parliament, before the expiration of the twenty-one days, annuls the Order, Rules or Regulation by the votes of not less than two-thirds of all the members of Parliament”.
    Mr Speaker, as I said, the issues that have been raised are matters that should engage the attention of all of us, and I am happy the Committee has related to it.
    Mr Speaker, as I said, the Order they quoted, Order 166, which is relevant to us, provides, and I quote with your permission;
    “After each Order, Rule or Regulation is laid before the House, the Committee shall, in particular, consider: --
    (a) whether it is in accordance with the general objects of the Constitution or that Act pursuant to which it is made…”
    The Committee which came by a unanimous decision, that is in the Report -- Those of them who are saying no, that is in the Report -- [Interruption]--
    Mr Speaker 2:27 p.m.
    Hon Members, let us be very mindful of certain kinds of conduct.
    It is a factum that we have a Report before us, and that Report is unanimous. We should not be playing games in this Honourable House.
    Hon Member, please, continue.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:27 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, and then, with your permission, Order 166 (3) (b) provides;
    “(b) whether it contains any matter which in the opinion of the Committee should more properly be dealt with in an Act of Parliament;
    (c)whether it contains imposition of any tax;
    (d) whether it directly or indirectly bars the jurisdiction of the courts;
    (e) whether it gives retrospective effect to any of the provisions in respect of which the Constitution or the Act does not expressly give any such power;
    (f) whether it involves expenditure from the Consolidated Fund or public revenue;
    (g) whether it appears to make some unusual or unexpected use of the powers conferred by the Constitution or that Act pursuant to which it is mades;
    (h) whether there appears to have been unjustifiable delay in its
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:27 p.m.


    publication or in laying it before Parliament;

    (i) whether for any reason its form or purport calls for any elucidation”.

    Mr Speaker, the Report from the Committee -- And the Subsidiary Legislation Committee is a Committee of Parliament; it is a Committee of all of us. We have appointed them to deliberate on an issue and come to advise us. Without any singular voice raised against the Report, all of them agreed that nothing untoward is being done.

    Mr Speaker -- [Interruption.] The issue about the breaches of the Constitution have been adequately addressed. But you would observe that the person who first raised it, Hon Alhaji Inusah Fuseini was very pointed and blunt, when he initially said that what is being done was “a violation of the Constitution”.

    Mr Speaker, subsequently, he moved away from that path and said that rather it was “a potential violation”. He realised that he was on wobbly legs, so he departed from that path -- [Interruption] --
    rose
    Mr Speaker 2:47 p.m.
    Yes, Hon Alhaji Fuseini?
    Hon Members, where the name of an Hon Member has been specifically mentioned, I look at his or her direction. When I see that an Hon Member is not pleased and he gets up, I would call him.

    Hon Alhaji Fuseini, do you rise on a point of order?
    Alhaji Fuseini 2:47 p.m.
    Indeed, Mr Speaker knows me so well. This is because he taught me Political Science.
    Mr Speaker, to say that a matter potentially violates the Constitution is to give deference to the court. I understand that the Hon Majority Leader is a Suame Lawyer -- [Laughter.] So, he does not know. It is to give deference to the court. I still hold the view that, that position violates article 107. But I said “potentially” because, I wanted to give deference to the court. [Hear! Hear!]
    Mr Speaker 2:47 p.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, you may continue.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:47 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, not only does the Hon Alhaji Fuseini has wobbly legs; he has a wobbly head. [Laughter.]
    Mr Speaker, the way he was shaking his head -- [Laughter.] He said to us that when he changed track, it was only to accord deference to the court. So, when he initially made the statement, did he not have deference?
    Mr Speaker, do you see how inconsistent he is? He is wobbling. In fact, now I can establish firmly that his whole physical constitution is wobbling -- [Interruption] -- from head to toe.
    Mr Speaker, the issue about Act 32 should be looked at. I have read that Report and they are telling us in paragraph 6.5 -- [Interruption] -- They dwelt on the engagement that they had with the Hon Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister for Justice.
    Mr Speaker 2:47 p.m.
    Hon Leader, in concluding?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:47 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, they said that the Deputy Attorney- General and Deputy Minister for Justice was optimistic that the problem would be solved in the near future to give opportunity to students who are interested in pursuing the professional law course to do so.

    Mr Speaker, as for the Hon Member who said I am poetising here --
    Mr Speaker 2:47 p.m.
    In conclusion?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:47 p.m.
    Who is so disturbed, he should tarry. The proper thing would be done.
    But let nobody say that what we are doing, potentially or real, is a retroactive law or a law with retrospective effect. It is neither here nor there. Indeed, for those of them who said that there should be unfettered access, the Constitution does not say so anywhere.
    Mr Speaker, for that reason, I would urge Hon Colleagues -- [Interruption] - - those of them who disagreed with the Hon Chairman and who are behind him to change their minds and join him -- The Hon Member who is in white and is seated in front of the Hon Chairman I know he has already changed his mind.
    Mr Speaker, I would urge all of us to approve of this, and subsequently as well as timeously, deal with the substantive law.

    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Mr Speaker 2:47 p.m.
    Hon Members, item numbered 9 -- Motion.
    Yes, Hon Chairman of the Committee?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:47 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, Motion captured as item numbered 10. [Uproar.]
    Mr Speaker 2:57 p.m.
    Hon Leader, who is the Hon Chairman of the Committee to move the procedural Motion numbered 10?
    Hon Majority Leader, item numbered
    10?
    [Some Hon Members sing the national anthem].
    Mr Speaker 2:57 p.m.
    Hon Majority, item listed
    10?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I said we would move to the item numbered 10.
    Mr Speaker 2:57 p.m.
    We would move on to the item numbered 10 -- Hon Chairman of the Committee?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 2:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, item numbered 10 -- Hon Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
    Mr Speaker 2:57 p.m.
    Item 10 -- Hon Chairman of the Committee?
    Chairman of the Committee (Mr Frank Annoh-Dompreh) 2:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 80 (1) which require that no Motion shall be debated until at least forty-eight hours have elapsed between the date on which notice of the Motion is given and the date on which the Motion is moved, the Motion for the adoption of the Report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs on the Protocol to the Constitutive Act of the African Union Relating to the Pan-African Parliament Dated 27th June, 2014 may be moved today.
    Mr Speaker 2:57 p.m.
    Who seconds the Motion?
    Alhaji Fuseini 2:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion ably moved by the Hon Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Resolved accordingly.
    Mr Speaker 2:57 p.m.
    Item listed 11 -- Hon Chairman of the Committee?
    MOTIONS 2:57 p.m.
    Chairman of the Committee (Mr Frank Annoh-Dompreh) 2:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that this Honourable House adopts the Report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs on the Protocol to the Constitutive Act of the African Union
    Relating to the Pan-African Parliament Dated 27th June 2014.
    Mr Speaker, in doing so, I present your Committee's Report.
    Introduction
    The Protocol on the Ratification of the Protocol to the Constitutive Act of the African Union Relating to the Pan-African Parliament was laid in Parliament on 23rd
    January 2018 in accordance with article 75 (2) of the Constitution. Mr Speaker referred the Protocol to the Committee on Foreign Affairs for consideration and report in accordance with Order 183 of the Standing Orders of the House.
    Deliberations
    The Committee met and deliberated on the Protocol with the Deputy Minister and Officials of the Legal Bureau of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration. The Committee is grateful to the Deputy Minister and Officials for attending upon it.
    Reference
    The Committee referred to the following documents at its deliberations:
    i.The 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana;
    ii. The Standing Orders of the Parliament of Ghana; and
    iii. The Constitutive Act of the African Union Relating to the Pan- African Parliament.
    Background
    The Pan-African Parliament (PAP) was established pursuant to article 17 of the Constitutive Act of the African Union
    (AU) as an organ in the Treaty establishing the African Economic Community. The Composition, Powers, Functions and Organization of the PAP are defined in the Protocol to the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community relating to the Pan African Parliament.
    The establishment of the PAP was informed by a vision to provide a common platform for African people and their grass- roots organisations to be more involved in discussions and decision-making on problems and challenges facing the Continent.
    The Protocol entered into force on 14th
    December, 2003 and the PAP was inaugurated on 18th March, 2004 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Under the current Protocol, the functions of the PAP are limited to consultative and advisory powers only with the “ultimate aim to evolve into an institution with full legislative powers, whose members are elected by universal adult suffrage”.
    The PAP forms part of the African Governance Architecture, which is the continental institutional framework, aimed at enhancing interactions and synergies between African Union organs and institutions with a formal mandate in governance and consolidating democracy in Africa.
    As part of its core objective, the PAP together with the African Commission on Human and People's Rights, the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights and the Department of Political Affairs of the African Union Commission, have been involved in promoting the ratification of the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance and several other AU instruments.
    Article 25 of the Protocol to the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community Relating to the Pan-African Parliament provides for a review, after five years of establishment and at further intervals of ten years of the operation and effectiveness of the Protocol, to ensure that its objectives and purposes as well as the vision underlying the Protocol were being realised and remained relevant to the evolving needs of the African continent.
    Consequently, in 2009, the Assembly of the Heads of State requested the AU Commission to initiate the review process of the Protocol in consultation with the Permanent Representative Council. The Reviewed Protocol was formally adopted by the Assembly of Heads of States on June 27, in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea.
    Summary of the Protocol
    The Protocol has 27 Articles.
    ARTICLE 1 is the interpretation and contains definitions of key words and phrases in the Protocol.
    ARTICLE 2 continued in existence, the PAP established by the Protocol to the Treaty establishing the African Economic Community Relating to the Establishment of the PAP. It further provides for organs of the PAP, the Plenary, the Bureau, the Secretariat, Committees and regional groups.
    ARTICLE 3 contained the objects of the PAP, which includes --
    i) giving voice to the African people and the Diaspora;
    ii) facilitate the effective implemen- tation of the policies and objectives of the AU;

    iii) promote the principles of human and peoples' rights and democracy in Africa;

    iv) encourage good governance, respect for the rule of law, transparency and accountability in Member States;

    v) promote peace, security and stability;

    vi) facilitate cooperation among Regional Economic Communities in Africa and encourage National and Regional Parliaments to ratify and integrate Treaties adopted by the AU into their legal systems;

    vii) co-operate with National and Regional Parliaments and similar bodies within and outside Africa as well as civil societies, community based organisations and grass-root organisations;

    viii) Invite and encourage the full participation of the African Diaspora as an important part of the African peoples in the building of the African Union in accordance with modalities approved by the Assembly.

    ARTICLES 4 and 5 provide for the election of five (5) Members by each State Party, two (2) of whom shall be women, from outside the National Parliament. The article revised the current composition of five (5) Members from each State Party one of whom is a woman, and who are selected from amongst member Parliaments. The representation must reflect diversity of political opinions.

    The provision emphasised that a delegation that does not satisfy the

    requirement of election and women representation should not be granted accreditation.

    ARICLE 6 provides a tenure of five (5) years for a Member and that Member shall be eligible for re-election for one (1) further term only whiles articles 7 provides for voting by Members.

    ARTICLE 8 provides for the functions and powers of the PAP. The essence of this Article is perhaps the most important revision of the existing Protocol by providing for a transition of the PAP from a consultative institution to a legislative institution as was earlier envisioned by the Establishing Protocol. The PAP is established by the Article as legislative organ of the African Union.

    ARTICLES 9 and 10 provide for privileges and immunities and allowances for Members.

    ARTICLE 11 empowers the PAP to adopt and amend its own Rules of Procedure whiles article 12 established the Bureau which shall be responsible for the development of policies for the management and administration of the affairs and properties of the PAP.

    ARTICLE 13 deals with the appointment of the Secretary General, the two Deputies and other staff for the proper functioning of the PAP.

    ARTICLE 14 enjoins Members to take or make a solemn declaration upon assumption of office whiles article 15 relates to sessions and quorum.

    ARTICLE 16 is on the budget of the PAP whiles article 17 designates the Republic of South Africa as the seat of the PAP but the official and working

    language shall be those of the AU (article

    18).

    ARTICLES 19 and 20 provide for a close cooperation with other Regional and National Parliaments and other organs of the AU. Article 21 provides that the Court shall have jurisdiction on all matters of interpretation of the Protocol.

    ARTICLE 22 provides for signature and ratification whiles Article 23 deals with entry into force of the Protocol.

    ARTICLE 24 provides that a Member State shall accede to the Protocol, after its entry into force, by depositing its instrument with the Chairperson of the Commission whiles article 25 and 26 relates to amendment and revision of the Protocol.

    ARTICLE 27 contains the transitional provisions.

    Observations

    The Committee made very pertinent observations during its deliberation. Some of these are outlined as follows:

    Legal Implication

    The Committee observed that the Protocol provided that Pan African Parliamentarians, while exercising their functions, shall enjoy in their territory of each Member States the immunities and Privileges extended to the representatives of Member States under the General Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the OAU (AU) and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961.

    The Committee further observed that, a Member of the PAP shall not be liable to civil or criminal proceedings, arrest, imprisonment or damages for what is said or done, within or outside the Pan African
    Chairman of the Committee (Mr Frank Annoh-Dompreh) 2:57 p.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that this Honourable House adopts the Report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs on the Protocol to the Constitutive Act of the African Union
    Relating to the Pan-African Parliament Dated 27th June 2014.
    Mr Speaker, in doing so, I present your Committee's Report.
    Introduction
    The Protocol on the Ratification of the Protocol to the Constitutive Act of the African Union Relating to the Pan-African Parliament was laid in Parliament on 23rd January 2018 in accordance with article 75 (2) of the Constitution. Mr Speaker referred the Protocol to the Committee on Foreign Affairs for consideration and report in accordance with Order 183 of the Standing Orders of the House.
    Deliberations
    The Committee met and deliberated on the Protocol with the Deputy Minister and Officials of the Legal Bureau of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration. The Committee is grateful to the Deputy Minister and Officials for attending upon it.
    Reference
    The Committee referred to the following documents at its deliberations:
    i.The 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana;
    ii. The Standing Orders of the Parliament of Ghana; and
    iii. The Constitutive Act of the African Union Relating to the Pan- African Parliament.
    Background
    The Pan-African Parliament (PAP) was established pursuant to article 17 of the Constitutive Act of the African Union
    (AU) as an organ in the Treaty establishing the African Economic Community. The Composition, Powers, Functions and Organization of the PAP are defined in the Protocol to the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community relating to the Pan African Parliament.
    The establishment of the PAP was informed by a vision to provide a common platform for African people and their grass- roots organisations to be more involved in discussions and decision-making on problems and challenges facing the Continent.
    The Protocol entered into force on 14th December, 2003 and the PAP was inaugurated on 18th March, 2004 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Under the current Protocol, the functions of the PAP are limited to consultative and advisory powers only with the “ultimate aim to evolve into an institution with full legislative powers, whose members are elected by universal adult suffrage”.
    The PAP forms part of the African Governance Architecture, which is the continental institutional framework, aimed at enhancing interactions and synergies between African Union organs and institutions with a formal mandate in governance and consolidating democracy in Africa.
    As part of its core objective, the PAP together with the African Commission on Human and People's Rights, the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights and the Department of Political Affairs of the African Union Commission, have been involved in promoting the ratification of the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance and several other AU instruments.
    Article 25 of the Protocol to the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community Relating to the Pan-African Parliament provides for a review, after five years of establishment and at further intervals of ten years of the operation and effectiveness of the Protocol, to ensure that its objectives and purposes as well as the vision underlying the Protocol were being realised and remained relevant to the evolving needs of the African continent.
    Consequently, in 2009, the Assembly of the Heads of State requested the AU Commission to initiate the review process of the Protocol in consultation with the Permanent Representative Council. The Reviewed Protocol was formally adopted by the Assembly of Heads of States on June 27, in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea.
    Summary of the Protocol
    The Protocol has 27 Articles.
    ARTICLE 1 is the interpretation and contains definitions of key words and phrases in the Protocol.
    ARTICLE 2 continued in existence, the PAP established by the Protocol to the Treaty establishing the African Economic Community Relating to the Establishment of the PAP. It further provides for organs of the PAP, the Plenary, the Bureau, the Secretariat, Committees and regional groups.
    ARTICLE 3 contained the objects of the PAP, which includes --
    i) giving voice to the African people and the Diaspora;
    ii) facilitate the effective implemen- tation of the policies and objectives of the AU;

    iii) promote the principles of human and peoples' rights and democracy in Africa;

    iv) encourage good governance, respect for the rule of law, transparency and accountability in Member States;

    v) promote peace, security and stability;

    vi) facilitate cooperation among Regional Economic Communities in Africa and encourage National and Regional Parliaments to ratify and integrate Treaties adopted by the AU into their legal systems;

    vii) co-operate with National and Regional Parliaments and similar bodies within and outside Africa as well as civil societies, community based organisations and grass-root organisations;

    viii) Invite and encourage the full participation of the African Diaspora as an important part of the African peoples in the building of the African Union in accordance with modalities approved by the Assembly.

    ARTICLES 4 and 5 provide for the election of five (5) Members by each State Party, two (2) of whom shall be women, from outside the National Parliament. The article revised the current composition of five (5) Members from each State Party one of whom is a woman, and who are selected from amongst member Parliaments. The representation must reflect diversity of political opinions.

    The provision emphasised that a delegation that does not satisfy the

    requirement of election and women representation should not be granted accreditation.

    ARICLE 6 provides a tenure of five (5) years for a Member and that Member shall be eligible for re-election for one (1) further term only whiles articles 7 provides for voting by Members.

    ARTICLE 8 provides for the functions and powers of the PAP. The essence of this Article is perhaps the most important revision of the existing Protocol by providing for a transition of the PAP from a consultative institution to a legislative institution as was earlier envisioned by the Establishing Protocol. The PAP is established by the Article as legislative organ of the African Union.

    ARTICLES 9 and 10 provide for privileges and immunities and allowances for Members.

    ARTICLE 11 empowers the PAP to adopt and amend its own Rules of Procedure whiles article 12 established the Bureau which shall be responsible for the development of policies for the management and administration of the affairs and properties of the PAP.

    ARTICLE 13 deals with the appointment of the Secretary General, the two Deputies and other staff for the proper functioning of the PAP.

    ARTICLE 14 enjoins Members to take or make a solemn declaration upon assumption of office whiles article 15 relates to sessions and quorum.

    ARTICLE 16 is on the budget of the PAP whiles article 17 designates the Republic of South Africa as the seat of the PAP but the official and working

    language shall be those of the AU (article

    18).

    ARTICLES 19 and 20 provide for a close cooperation with other Regional and National Parliaments and other organs of the AU. Article 21 provides that the Court shall have jurisdiction on all matters of interpretation of the Protocol.

    ARTICLE 22 provides for signature and ratification whiles Article 23 deals with entry into force of the Protocol.

    ARTICLE 24 provides that a Member State shall accede to the Protocol, after its entry into force, by depositing its instrument with the Chairperson of the Commission whiles article 25 and 26 relates to amendment and revision of the Protocol.

    ARTICLE 27 contains the transitional provisions.

    Observations

    The Committee made very pertinent observations during its deliberation. Some of these are outlined as follows:

    Legal Implication

    The Committee observed that the Protocol provided that Pan African Parliamentarians, while exercising their functions, shall enjoy in their territory of each Member States the immunities and Privileges extended to the representatives of Member States under the General Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the OAU (AU) and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961.

    The Committee further observed that, a Member of the PAP shall not be liable to civil or criminal proceedings, arrest, imprisonment or damages for what is said or done, within or outside the Pan African
    Mr Speaker 2:57 p.m.
    Who seconds the Motion?
    Mr Fuseini Issah 3:07 a.m.
    (NPP — Okaikoi North): Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
    Question proposed.

    Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration (Alhaji Habibu Tijani Mohammad)(MP): Mr Speaker, for the sake of time, I would want to make a brief statement.

    Mr Speaker, Hon Members of this House have participated in the activities of the Pan-African Parliament since its establishment in 2004. In this regard, the ratification is to give legal effect to the Protocol, establishing the Parliament within Ghana's domestic jurisdiction and to enhance and further deepen the contribution of this House to the work of the Pan-African Parliament.

    I, therefore, call on the House to ratify the Protocol in accordance with the stipulations of the 1992 Constitution and the applicable rules of this House.

    Thank you, Mr Speaker.
    Mr Speaker 3:07 a.m.
    Thank you very much.
    Hon Chairman of the Committee, do you have any contribution?
    Mr Annoh-Dompreh 3:07 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to make a few comments on the Motion.
    We are all aware of the functionality of the Pan-African Parliament and the role it has played over the years. However, we should not lose sight of the challenges that the Pan-African Parliament faces.
    There is the first challenge among others, the lack of legislative interventions in crisis-ridden countries. Going further, now that the Pan-African Parliament would be clothed and not just have the power of only negotiations, but legislative power, it is important that it begins to think about innovations and good approaches to get relevant legislation that would seek to resolve crisis in crisis-ridden countries. Again, concerns about paucity of funds is one that has to be considered.
    Mr Speaker, with these few words, I thank you for the opportunity.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Mr Speaker 3:07 a.m.
    Item numbered 12 -- Resolutions?
    RESOLUTIONS 3:07 a.m.
    Chairman of the Committee (Mr Frank Annoh-Dompreh) 3:07 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.
    Question put and Motion agreed to.
    Mr Speaker 3:07 a.m.
    Hooting is unparliamentary conduct. That conduct is unparliamentary. [Interruption.]
    Resolved accordingly.
    Mr Speaker 3:07 a.m.
    Hon Majority Leader, it appears we have exhausted our business listed for the day. Just in case there is no specific announcement to make, I would adjourn us till Wednesday.
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 3:07 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, after the first vote on the L.I., I got up on three different occasions, but I was not recognised by you; and on all occasions, I sat down. I have also seen the Hon Majority Chief Whip up and he has also not been recognised by you.
    Given the circumstance, I would plead with the Chair that we adjourn proceedings until next Wednesday, because Tuesday is a public holiday.
    Mr Speaker 3:07 a.m.
    We adjourn to?
    Mr Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu 3:07 a.m.
    Mr Speaker, Wednesday, 7th March, 2018.
    ADJOURNMENT 3:07 a.m.
  • The House was adjourned at 3.15 p.m. till Wednesday, 7th March, 2018 at 10.00 a.m.