Mr Speaker, that is exactly why it is here, because it talks about its independence but gives an exception. It says that, in terms of accountability, we are talking about Parliament's approval of their funds and where it would be situated.
Mr Speaker, is it going to be part of the budget of the Attorney-General and Ministry of Justice or we are going to create a situation where we would recruit at the Government machinery? That is the reason it specifically states here that yes, they will be independent except this one.
That is the reason I said that, that rendition itself needs to be looked at. But clause 19 just talks about its activities' report which have to be submitted to Parliament through the Hon Minister. But I would want to believe that where it is independent, it says that when it comes to its accountability it cannot be independent.
Mr Speaker, I would want to believe that is the reason it is here and that is why I asked the Hon Minister to know what they truly want. For example, if we take the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), it is supposed to be independent but it takes policy directions in terms of its budget from the Attorney-General and Ministry of Justice.
Mr Speaker, is it the same thing they want to do with this Agency or this Agency is going to stand like the Office of the Special Prosecutor, Commission of Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) or the National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE)? Is this what they really want to do? They need to get that clear, if not, they may get it wrong because clause 19 just talks about reporting.
Mr Speaker, remember that the Electoral Commission (EC), NCCE and almost all the independent Constitutional bodies report to this House about their activities. This report in clause 19 talks about this reporting but this very one in clause 5 (2) is about its funding and other policies. They could be independent but when it comes to accountability and policies, they would take directions from the Ministry.
Now, when they delete it, all that the Ministry will be left with is reporting. They will give you their activity report and you may not even have the power to do anything about it apart from forwarding it to Parliament. Is that what they want to do? That is the reason why I am saying that it is the Ministry, led by the Hon Minister or the Hon Deputy here, to tell us what they want.
This is because, if we delete it without having in mind what the intent is, we will be sweeping them off and when it comes to budgeting, we will then struggle as to where to put their budget.
So if we want to, we could stand it down for further consultations without necessarily deleting it. This is because if we do that, accountability and oversight issues would be gone.
Mr Speaker, I may suggest to the Hon Chairman that we stand it down for further consultations instead of just deleting it. But if the Hon Minister is certain that they
do not want to have anything to do with them, then we would delete it and go knowing that they will only report their activities to be forwarded to Parliament. That is all they can do; they cannot give them any directions and they cannot tell them how to use their money or do anything. Is that what they want to do?