Private legal practitioner Professor Kwaku Asare, aka Kwaku Azar is proposing to Parliament to consider using the various committees that they have in the House to vet the ministers-designate for their respective ministries.

Per his proposal, he wants, for example, the Finance Committee in Parliament to vet the designated minister for Finance and Planning.

The lawyer and accounting professor explained that his proposal if practised would take off the load on the Appointments Committee in vetting all the ministers-designate for the ministries we have in the country.

He wrote: “Parliament has Select Committees for each ministry, responsible for oversight of the ministry’s spending, policies, and administration.

In line with GOGO, we suggest that these Select Committees should also be charged with the duty of vetting their ministers, deputies and related officers.

The advantages of this approach is that vetting can proceed simultaneously (more than one a time). Further, it spreads the workload and may also allow vetting to be done by the MPs with the most knowledge in that area. So for instance, the Legal and Subsidiary committee may be in a better position to vet judges than an Appointment Committee, etc. The Agriculture Select Committee will vet nominees to the Agriculture ministry, etc.”

Read his full opinion below

Parliament plays an important role in the appointment of certain public officers. The House is required to confirm several nominees appointed by the President.

Currently, the House does most of the work through its Appointment Committee, which vets and recommends to the House persons nominated by the President for appointment as Ministers, Deputy Ministers, and such other persons as are specified under the Constitution or under any other enactment.

There is nothing wrong with that. Parliament, as is often said, is the master of its own rules.

However, there is also nothing wrong with ordinary citizens proposing for consideration other modes of vetting.

Under the existing regime, committee vetting of appointees must be done sequentially (one at a time) since only one person can appear before the Committee at a time.

Committee members can also be overwhelmed because they and their staff must do research about several appointees, especially at a time when the President is forming his new team.

Parliament may want to consider an alternative approach that spreads the vetting load on different committees.

Parliament has Select Committees for each ministry, responsible for oversight of the the ministry’s spending, policies and administration.

In line with GOGO, we suggest that these Select Committees should also be charged with the duty of vetting their ministers, deputies and related officers.

The advantages of this approach is that vetting can proceed simultaneously (more than one a time). Further, it spreads the work load and may also allow vetting to be done by the MPs with the most knowledge in that area. So for instance, the Legal and Subsidiary committee may be in a better position to vet judges than an Appointment Committee, etc. The Agriculture Select Committee will vet nominees to the Agriculture ministry, etc.

For the avoidance of doubt, this is a mere suggestion. It is up to Parliament to establish its own procedures.

However, Parliament has no such discretion when it comes to disenfranchisement of #SALL. The Speaker and Members must call for an immediate atonement of that cardinal sin.

Da Yie!