EXTENDING THE CURRENT LAWS ON ELECTION OFFENCES TO COVER PARTY PRIMARIES AND INTRA-PARTY ELECTIONS

Our ref: OG/2023/026
 
9 October 2023
 
Godfred Dame, Esq
Hon Attorney-General & Minister of Justice
Office of the Attorney General & Ministry of Justice
Accra
 
Osei Kyei Mensah Bonsu, MP
Hon Majority Leader
Parliament House
Accra
 
Dr Cassiel Ato Forson, MP
Hon Minority Leader
Parliament House
Accra
 
Gentlemen:
 
EXTENDING THE CURRENT LAWS ON ELECTION OFFENCES TO COVER PARTY PRIMARIES AND INTRA-PARTY ELECTIONS
 
We write to invite you to co-sponsor and introduce a bill in Parliament that will specifically extend the current laws that provide and punish for public election offences, to cover party primaries and intra-party elections. We believe that this will be the first step to stemming the now rampant vote-buying, intimidation, violence etc that have become associated with such elections.
 
OccupyGhana has been very concerned about the phenomena where persons use money and gifts to bribe voters and/or use intimidation, violence, personation, insults, tribalism, falsehoods, etc, against opponents in all elections. These have grown to shockingly brazen levels, especially in party primaries to elect presidential and parliamentary candidates and intra-party elections to elect party officials.
 
Both the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29) and the Representation of the People Act, 1992 (PNDCL 284) contain elaborate provisions that criminalise all of these acts. Persons convicted of such offences are liable to a range of fines, terms of imprisonment, and even disqualification from voting. 
 
However, apart from the fact that these provisions are hardly seen to be enforced, these statutes refer only to ‘public elections,’ which, as seen under article 49 of the Constitution, may not cover party primaries and intra-party elections. This might explain why we see no prosecutions when these happen.
 
We therefore invite you, as the Attorney-General and as the parliamentary leadership of the parties with representation in the current Parliament, to co-sponsor and introduce a bill in Parliament that specifically extends the application of these existing offences to party primaries and intra-party elections. The proposed amendment should also remove the requirement for the Attorney-General’s fiat before prosecutions may be commenced. 
 
These, we believe, will indicate to Ghanaians that the government and the two leading parties want to banish this phenomenon from all of our elections, whether public or not, and to every extent possible and permitted by law. When passed, strict enforcement should breathe new anti-corruption life into our body-politic. 
 
Gentlemen, your refusal, failure, or neglect to take this step will finally provide basis for the suspicion that the government and the two leading parties actively support, or are complicit in perpetrating, this wrongful conduct.
 
Yours in the service of God and Country,
 
 
OccupyGhana
 
cc        Rt Hon Alban Bagbin
Speaker
Parliament
Accra
 
Joseph Osei-Owusu, MP
Hon First Deputy Speaker
Parliament
Accra
 
Andrew Asiamah Amoako, MP
Hon Second Deputy Speaker
Parliament
Accra
 
Alfred Tuah-Yeboah, MP
Hon Deputy Attorney-General
Accra
 
Diana Asonaba Dapaah
Hon Deputy Attorney-General
Accra
 
Alexander Afenyo-Markin, MP
Hon Deputy Majority Leader
Parliament
Accra
 
Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah, MP
Hon Deputy Minority Leader
Parliament
Accra
 
Frank Annoh-Dompreh, MP
Hon Majority Chief Whip
Parliament
Accra
 
Lydia Seyram Alhassan, MP
Hon First Deputy Majority Whip
Parliament 
Accra
 
Habib Iddrisu, MP
Hon Second Deputy Majority Whip
Parliament 
Accra
 
Kwame Agbodza, MP
Hon Minority Chief Whip
Parliament
Accra
 
Ahmed Ibrahim, MP
Hon First Deputy Minority Whip
Parliament
Accra
 
Comfort Doyoe Cudjoe, MP
Hon Second Deputy Minority Whip
Parliament
Accra
 
Mrs Jean Mensah
Chairperson
Electoral Commission
Accra
 
All Media Houses

RE: RIGHT TO INFORMATION REQUEST ON THE STATUS OF THE DRAFT CONDUCT OF PUBLIC OFFICERS BILL, 2022

Our ref: OG/2023/021

10 September 2023

The Minister for Finance
Ministry of Finance
Accra

Dear Sir:

RE: RIGHT TO INFORMATION REQUEST ON THE STATUS OF THE DRAFT CONDUCT OF PUBLIC OFFICERS BILL, 2022

We have been corresponding with the Secretary to the Cabinet, Office of the President, on the above-entitled matter. We have attached to this letter, all the correspondence between us, for ease of reference.

The Secretary to Cabinet now has informed us, by a letter received by us on 6 September 2023 but dated 18 August 2023 ref OPCA.3/3/180823, that Cabinet is awaiting a memorandum from your office for consideration before it concludes deliberations on the matter.

We write to inquire about the status of the said memorandum. Kindly indicate to us when you expect to complete the memorandum and when you propose to submit it to cabinet.

Yours in the service of God and Country,

OccupyGhana

Chief of Staff
Office of the President
Jubilee House
Accra

Attorney-General & Minister for Justice
Office of the Attorney-General & Minister for Justice
Accra

Minister for Information
Ministry of Information
Accra

Secretary to the Cabinet
Office of the President
Jubilee House
Accra

Executive Secretary
Right to Information Commission
Accra

Media Houses

DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST FROM ALL PLANNED RELEASE OF PUBLIC LANDS TO ALLEGED PRE-ACQUISITION OWNERS

Our Ref: OG/2023/017

10 July 2023

The Minister
Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources
Accra

Executive Secretary
Lands Commission
Accra

Dear Sirs:

DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST FROM ALL PLANNED RELEASE OF PUBLIC LANDS TO ALLEGED PRE-ACQUISITION OWNERS

We write to demand that the Government and Lands Commission (1) properly account to Ghanaians for all public lands that have been purportedly released to alleged, previous owners or any other persons, and (2) immediately cease and desist from implementing any plans to cede ownership of further public lands, until you comply with constitutional conditions-precedent to any such transactions.

PRESIDENT AS TRUSTEE, LANDS COMMISSION AS MANAGER
Under the Constitution, all compulsorily acquired lands are ‘public lands.’ According to the Supreme Court, this applies whether the land is vested in the State ‘or assigned to a particular public service institution.’ While public lands are vested in President in trust for the people, the power to manage such lands is vested exclusively in the Lands Commission. We contend that the Lands Commission’s power to manage does not include the unilateral power to cede ownership of public lands to any other person.

According to the Constitution, in the performance of its functions, the Lands Commission is independent of ‘any person or authority,’ subject only to limitations provided in either the Constitution itself or other constitutionally-compliant laws. The Constitution then binds the Lands Commission to comply with only Presidentially-Approved Written General Directions (‘PAWGDs’) issued by the Lands and Natural Resources Minister. Thus, the Minister may only make approved directions of a general nature, but cannot be involved in or instruct on any acts that amount to direct and specific management of public lands. Those would be unconstitutional and void.

LANDS COMMISSION’S FIDUCIARY OBLIGATIONS
The Constitution also imposes on the Lands Commission, as the ‘manager of public lands,’ the same fiduciary and accountability obligations of trustees. Therefore, neither the Government nor the Lands Commission may dispose of any public lands, being trust property, without observing the constitutional architecture put in place to prevent a wanton dissipation of such lands.

If public lands must be sold, then first, the Government, acting in utmost good faith, observing its trust duties of honesty, integrity and loyalty, and considering what is in the best interest of the people, would have to issue a relevant PAWGD. It is only after that, that the Lands Commission, observing the same trust duties, would independently manage the process.

ABSENCE OF PAWGDs
However, and following the unfortunate, but thankfully, failed attempt to release Achimota Forest lands to so-called pre-acquisition owners, both the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources (in a letter dated 14 July 2022, ref GA 110/280/01) and the Lands Commission (in a letter dated 14 July 2022, ref SCR/LCS 3/v.7/13) have admitted to us that there are no PAWGDs in place.

We are convinced that the Constitution provided for PAWGDs because public lands must be managed in the supreme interest of the people of Ghana, and not any section of us. If the public ownership of those lands must be relinquished, then the people of Ghana (as the owners and beneficiaries of those lands) must have the opportunity to see and debate the draft PAWGDs and express our views on them.

We are firmly convinced that without the relevant PAWGDs, it is unconstitutional for either the Government and/or the Lands Commission, to cede ownership of any public lands, thereby depriving the people of ultimate ownership.

LANDS COMMISSION’S DISCLOSURES
In partial answer to our right to information request, the Lands Commission has claimed, by a letter dated 13 March 2023 ref SCR/LCS 3/v.7/73, that only six tracts of public lands have been released to so-called pre-acquisition owners. These lands cover a massive total area of 2,371.867 acres in Accra, namely Mpehuasem, Nungua, Madina and Adentan.

Two of those land tracts (covering 1582.83 acres) have been leased back to the original owners at either peppercorn or no rent. The Lands Commission explains that economic rent would be applicable upon transfer of interest to third parties. We are aware that all of those lands have indeed been assigned or sublet to third parties. Yet the Lands Commission, in clear breach of its constitutional duties, is unable or unwilling to disclose who the current assignees and sublessees are, and how much economic rent has been recovered, if any.

The remaining four land tracts (covering 779.037 acres) have been released to the original owners, absolutely and for free. However, instead of issuing PAWGDs, different Lands Ministers simply assumed unconstitutional land management powers and issued Executive Instruments to redraw the boundaries, and thereby effectively released the lands. These are unconstitutional and void.

Further, the Lands Commission’s 13 March 2023 letter does not appear to have considered other public lands that had been assigned to other public institutions, and which may have also been released. According to the Supreme Court, such lands still constitute public lands, and that even where such institutions have ‘no further use of the land…, the land reverts to the State represented by the Lands Commission.’ Thus, to the extent that any state institution has released any such lands, instead of returning them to the Lands Commission, those releases are also unconstitutional and void.

CEASE AND DESIST
It is in the light of the above that we write to demand that:

(1) the Lands Commission should FORTHWITH, properly disclose to us, information on the current holders of ALL public lands (within the definition provided by the Supreme Court) that have been released throughout the country, and how much has been derived by way of economic rent from third-party leases; and

(2) the Government and Lands Commission should suspend all planned releases of public lands (including the Achimota Forest lands) until the Government has, after public debate, issued the constitutionally-required PAWGDs.

Take notice that if you ignore these demands and/or proceed with any such unconstitutional transactions, we will sue both the Government and the Lands Commission to restrain such unconstitutional conduct, and to reverse such acts.

Yours in the service of God and Country

OccupyGhana

cc.
Speaker of Parliament
Parliament House
Accra

Chief of Staff
Office of the President
Jubilee House
Accra

Attorney-General and Minister for Justice
Office of the Attorney-General and Ministry of Justice
Accra

Chairperson
Ministerial Advisory Board
Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources
Accra

Media Houses

RE: RIGHT TO INFORMATION REQUEST ON THE STATUS OF THE DRAFT CONDUCT OF PUBLIC OFFICERS BILL, 2022

Our Ref

Our Ref: OG/2023/015

30 May 2023

Secretary to the Cabinet
Office of the President
Jubilee House
Accra

Dear Madam:

RE: RIGHT TO INFORMATION REQUEST ON THE STATUS OF THE DRAFT CONDUCT OF PUBLIC OFFICERS BILL, 2022

The above-entitled matter refers.

OccupyGhana is pleasantly amazed and amused to read that the Government has finally agreed to enact the Conduct of Public Officers Act, because it is now being compelled by the International Monetary Fund to do so, as part of the conditionalities for the US$3Billion Extended Credit Facility Arrangement for Ghana.

We have written to your office several times to demand that Cabinet approves the draft Conduct of Public Officers Bill, 2022 that was submitted to Cabinet by the Attorney-General, and then send it to Parliament for debate and enactment. We kept the pressure on until the Government slammed the door in our faces. In your letter to us dated 14 February 2023, ref OPCA.3/3/140223, you stated emphatically that Cabinet has “taken the view that there are adequate provisions that deal with the conduct of public officers in the existing law,” and therefore “Cabinet has declined approval for the Memorandum.”

What was even more shocking was that the Office of the President chose to wrongfully stamp this letter as “CONFIDENTIAL” and then mark each page as “SECRET.” You have neither acknowledged nor responded to our letters to you dated 20 and 27 February 2023, challenging this illegal branding of the letters and demanding their withdrawal.

Overall, Cabinet’s refusal to approve the draft Bill flew in the face of all the promises that this Government had made to Ghanaians on this matter, including, particularly the following statement at page 105 of the New Patriotic Party’s 2020 Manifesto:
[Attached]

Disappointed at this volte-face, we considered several options including petitioning the Right to Information Commission for a determination of the absurd claim of confidentiality and secrecy. We also considered suing the Government or presenting a bill to Parliament to amend the specifically offending portion of section 1 of the Public Office Holders (Declaration of Assets and Disqualification) Act 1998 (Act 550), which unconstitutionally extends by six months, the fixed times that the Constitution provides for assets declaration by public officers.

That is why we are amazed and amused that the Government, now under pressure from the IMF, is promising to pass into law, the Bill that you told us, as recently as February of this year, would not be approved. We note that the IMF COUNTRY REPORT No 23/169, page 22, paragraph 44, says “The authorities are also committed to addressing weaknesses in the existing asset declaration system for public officials—which currently lacks an effective verification process—by enacting a new Conduct of Public Officers Act.”

We are tickled that in the attachment titled MEMORANDUM OF ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL POLICIES, at page 69, paragraph 52, the Government itself says “We will continue to strengthen organizational and legal arrangements for addressing corruption and enhancing accountability and integrity: This will include improvements in the existing asset declaration system. The enactment of Conduct of Public Officers Act will notably seek to address current weaknesses of this system.”

Then there is the Statement by Messrs Bijani, Sassanpour and Akosah dated 17 May 2023, which says at page 6: “The authorities are committed to address macro-critical gaps in Ghana’s governance framework, enhance accountability and fight corruption forcefully. They will enact the Conduct of Public Officers Act to address identified weaknesses in the existing asset declaration system.”

We are glad and saddened at the same time that the Government that thumbed its nose at us on this issue, has now found its way back to the table, compelled, not because the activism of well-meaning citizens, but because Ghana’s current economic dire straits and the dictates of the IMF. We however wish to assure the Government that we remain ready and willing to assist Cabinet in reconsidering the draft Bill, approving it and sending it to Parliament for debate and enactment.

We have therefore taken steps to address the previous, false claim by Cabinet that everything that the draft Bill seeks to do is already covered by existing law. We are attaching to this letter, a 20-page table containing our comparative analyses of the Bill and existing law, to show that contrary to what Cabinet claimed and which was communicated to us in your 14 February 2023 letter, the vast majority of the Bill’s clauses do not exist already in Ghana law. It is still our conviction that passing the Bill into law will go a long way to properly regulate the conduct of public officers, and bring to pass the Government’s new promise to the IMF that the new Act will “address current weaknesses of [the assets declaration] system” and “strengthen organizational and legal arrangements for addressing corruption and enhancing accountability and integrity.”

Yours in the service of God and Country,

OccupyGhana

cc. Chief of Staff
Office of the President
Jubilee House
Accra

Attorney-General & Minister for Justice
Office of the Attorney-General & Minister for Justice
Accra

Minister for Information
Ministry of Information
Accra

Executive Secretary
Right to Information Commission
Accra

Media Houses

RE: AUDITOR-GENERAL RETRIEVES GHȻ2.2BN – REPRESENTS DISALLOWANCES FROM 2017 TO 2020

Our ref: OG/2023/012

7 March 2023

The Auditor-General
Auditor-General’s Department
P O Box M 96
Accra

Dear Sir:

RE: AUDITOR-GENERAL RETRIEVES GHȻ2.2BN – REPRESENTS DISALLOWANCES FROM 2017 TO 2020

On 30 September 2022 we wrote to you (our ref: OG/2022/037), demanding evidence backing the claim that you had issued disallowances and made recoveries in the amount stated in the heading to this letter.

You responded by a letter signed by one Ali Mohammed Zakaria (DAG/FAHRD) and dated 7 October 2022 (your ref: DAG/F&A/FIN/22.10/001), claiming that you had drafted a report on the recoveries, you were finalising it for Parliament, and ‘immediately the report is finalised a copy will be made available’ to us.

On 11 January 2023, we wrote to you (our ref: OG/2023/001) to inquire whether you had finalised your report, and requesting that a copy of the report be made available to us. You have not responded to that letter.

We write to repeat our request and to notify you that we will escalate this request to the Right to Information Commission, if we do not receive a copy of the promised report from you within seven days of the date of this letter.

Yours in the service of God and Country

OccupyGhana

cc. Ali Mohammed Zakaria, DAG/FAHRD
Auditor-General’s Department, Accra

RE: AUDIT OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS OF GHANA

Our ref: OG/2023/006

14 February 2023

Attorney General & Minister of Justice
Office of the Attorney General & Ministry of Justice
Accra

Dear Sir:

RE: AUDIT OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS OF GHANA

We have seen and read a copy of your letter to the Auditor General dated 7th February 2023 on the above matter, the contents of which are most alarming, as they fly directly in the face of express constitutional provisions and Supreme Court pronouncements.

We take strong issue with your letter because:

  1. Subjecting any function of the Auditor-General to parliamentary approval is in blatant conflict with the form and substance of his constitutionally-protected and independent mandate;
  2. Although the Auditor-General has to complete his audit and submit it to Parliament, there is nothing in the Constitution that restricts also publishing the reports so that ‘We The People’ will know what has happened to and 3. with our money;
    The Auditor-General’s power to disallow and surcharge is independent of Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee process, which Parliament may only invoke ‘where necessary;’ and
  3. The issues raised in your letter have formed part of the proceedings before the Supreme Court and have already been decided.

Sir, your office, as defendant in OCCUPYGHANA v ATTORNEY-GENERAL, made similar arguments in defence to our action, thereby seeking to diminish the independent authority of the Auditor-General’s functions. The Supreme Court considered and dismissed them all, stating that the Auditor-General’s independent constitutional mandate ‘far exceeds’ just auditing and then preparing reports to parliament that draw attention to irregularities. The court said those irregularities ‘must definitely trigger his powers of Disallowance and Surcharge obligations.’
The court also rejected subjecting the powers of the Auditor-General to any other statutory bodies, which would include Parliament and any legislative interventions, as your letter seems to suggest. The Supreme Court was also careful to warn against any attempts to deprecate the constitutional mandate of the Auditor General, which is what your letter seeks to do, when it said:

‘Taking a cue from the importance of the work that is attached to the office of the Auditor-General and the fact that it is the custodian and protector of the public purse, any derogation of the functions … will defeat the lofty aims and objectives stated in the Preamble to the Constitution and the role and objectives of the work of the Auditor-General.’

We therefore reiterate our strong disagreement with you especially when the Supreme Court emphasised that the Auditor-General’s constitutionally independent powers ‘have to be on a higher pedestal and given pride of place.’

In all your arguments, you stridently evade or avoid any mention of article 187(7)(a) of the Constitution, which states emphatically that ‘in the performance of his functions under this Constitution or any other law THE AUDITOR-GENERAL SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO THE DIRECTION OR CONTROL OF ANY OTHER PERSON OR AUTHORITY’ [emphasis added.]

Sir, your office was, again, the defendant in BROWN v ATTORNEY-GENERAL, when Wood CJ held this constitutional provision ‘underpins and secures … independence’ and ‘insulates… against all forms of external pressures.’ Dotse JSC said it ensures that the institution ‘is insulated and protected from undue governmental control and direction.’ Anin Yeboah JSC (as he then was) added that the Auditor-General’s independence under the provision was ‘in pursuance of probity and accountability.’

Again, your office was the defendant in APPIAH-OFORI v ATTORNEY-GENERAL, when the Supreme Court reiterated that ‘in the discharge of his duties the Auditor-General enjoys much independence for he is not subject to the direction or control of any other person or authority.’ On this point, Dotse JSC, even in his dissenting opinion, agreed with the majority of the court, and provided an erudite context as follows:

‘…the office of the Auditor-General is a very important position which should not be toyed with whatsoever… It should be noted that in view of the very important watchdog role that the Auditor-General plays or is supposed to superintend in the transparent use and accountability of the public purse, any attempt to prejudice and or compromise his position by linking it to the pleasure of a sitting President is untenable. This is because the President is the head of the Executive Branch of Government whose use of monies entrusted to them the Auditor-General is constitutionally mandated to Audit.’

If the Auditor-General cannot be tied to the apron strings of the President who is an auditee, then that office, surely, cannot be tied to the apron strings of Parliament, which is also an auditee.

Sir, in 2017, the Supreme Court in OCCUPYGHANA v ATTORNEY-GENERAL ordered you and the Auditor-General to work together in enforcing his disallowances and surcharges. In your letter to us dated 19 July 2022 (your ref. F.28/S4.8), you confessed that both your office and the Auditor-General have done next to nothing to comply with the Supreme Court’s mandatory orders. In that letter, you wrote that ‘I take cognisance of SIGNIFICANT TARDINESS in the process to enforce notices of disallowances and surcharge issued by the Auditor-General since 2016.’ Then, you also informed us that you had ‘set up a special team specifically assigned for the purpose of coordinating with the Auditor-General.’ Seven months after that letter, it appears that you are now informing the Auditor-General of the committee, and then inviting him to set up ‘a similar team to work with my office.’

We do not need to remind both you and the Auditor-General that under article 2(4) and (5) of the Constitution, your admitted failure to carry out the terms of the Supreme Court’s orders constitutes a high crime, and renders you and the Auditor-General liable to fine and/or imprisonment, and a ban from holding public office for ten years after serving the term of imprisonment.

With the greatest respect, you cannot worsen this by your current approach. It will set back efforts at ensuring the independence and good governance of the office of the Auditor-General and other constitutionally mandated bodies, and lead to a decline in good governance and a lack of integrity of public officials.

We are copying the Auditor-General in this letter, and urging him to ignore your letter as being blatantly unconstitutional. If you are unhappy with the state of the law as expressed in the Constitution and interpreted by the Supreme Court, you may take your case to the Supreme Court. Or, since you are already a defendant in ISAAC WILBERFORCE MENSAH v AUDITOR-GENERAL, AUDIT SERVICE BOARD & ATTORNEY-GENERAL, which seeks yet another Supreme Court pronouncement on the independence of the Auditor-General, you may, more than two years after the matter was last called in court, finally file the agreed Memorandum of Issues that you have failed, refused or neglected to file. We are taking the opportunity to attach to this letter a proposed Memorandum of Issues for your consideration and adoption so that you may file it in the Supreme Court for that matter to proceed.

Finally, we would respectfully advice you to cease and desist from this course of action, and allow the Auditor-General to do the work as the Constitution and the Supreme Court have stated.

Yours in the service of God and country

OccupyGhana

cc. The Auditor-General
Office of the Auditor-General
Accra