A Ghanaian legal guru and member of the Ghanaweb discussion forum (SayItLoud), Professor H. Kwesi Prempeh, has cautioned that ministries and ministerial positions that are created, merely on the basis of presidential fiat, have no assurance of continuity in the event of a change in government, especially if the new government also finds them unnecessary.

Apart from the risk of ending up as a temporary entity, they are also bound to create budgetary disruptions, because no public funds have been earmarked for them in the relevant budget.

Professor Prempeh is a professor of law at the Seton Hall University School of Law, New Jersey, USA and also the Director of Legal Policy and Governance at the Centre for Democratic Development (CDD) Ghana, an NGO dedicated to the promotion of democracy and good governance. He made a number of mind tickling observations when he presented a paper on “ The Constitution and Economic Governance In Ghana” in Accra last weekend.

Prof Prempeh explained that the paper specifically had the intention of finding out how far the constitution of 1992 has fostered democracy and good economic governance ten years after it was promulgated; its deficits and the prospects for the future. This decision, he said, was based on a number of reviews that showed that so far there has been a focus on political governance, whilst little or no attention has been paid to the equally important issue of economic governance and how the constitution works to promote or impede its achievement.

The paper he said is the result of a thorough research, him and Prof. Kwaku Asare (Kweku Azar) of the University of Florida USA, also a member of SIL.

Touching on the issue of creating new constituencies, Prempeh asked, “What is the justification for expanding parliament? Additional numbers means additional costs in running elections, maintaining parliament and MPs. Already at 200, parliament is suffering from a substantial resource deficit. What the Electoral Commission should do he suggested is to bring reasonable equity in the population per constituency. It cannot run away from the problem by seeking to create new constituencies without regard to the cost implications of the decision”.

According to him the total revenue that would be going to this selected class of people will crowd out the national objectives of infrastructural development.

With the problems associated with the interpretation of the constitution in the number of judges for the Supreme Court, he said, “ the constitution’s lack of cost consciousness is further evidence of its failure to place a numerical ceiling on the size of the supreme court, and in its establishment of certain auxiliary institutions of dubious marginal utility or value but which have to be maintained at considerable cost to national treasury”.

Prof. Prempeh expressed regret at the fact that given the importance of foreign borrowing and the implications of concurrent liabilities in the long term, it seems as if there is no rigid parliamentary oversight Committee to vet such agreements, because if such a body had been functioning effectively the issue of the $1 billion fiasco IFC loan would not have occurred.

Prof. Prempeh disagreed with the call for state funding for political parties. “I wonder why people think the state should fund everything. I believe some people think that the state coffers is a gravy train where resource abound without limits in my opinion all political parties have large followings, why can they not raise funds from dues paid by members,” he retorted.

Reacting to this comment, Dr. K.B Asante a former diplomat and politician explained that the decision for the debate on public funding arose from the fact that incumbent governments have been sponsoring political parties that they are in favour of through dubious means, therefore if it is made public this will be more transparent.

According to Mr. Asante “ it suggests that so many things have to be done. It is clear that we have not been doing our duty, I do not know but I think it is in our character we know what is right but we do not do it”.