Minority Leader in Parliament, Osei Kyei Mensah Bonsu, has criticized the presidential system of governance being practiced in Ghana saying, it is a key contributor to corruption.
The presidential system gives autonomy to the President over the Executive arm of government.
It is a system of government where the Executive branch exists separately from a Legislature, to which in most cases; the former is generally not accountable to the latter.
According Mr. Mensah Bonsu, the flaws in the presidential system outweighs its positives, thus the need to switch to a better model.
He, therefore, recommended the Westminster system as the ideal model of governance for Ghana since it has been proven to be the best through several studies.
The Westminster system is a democratic parliamentary system of government modelled after the politics of the United Kingdom.
It is used, or was once used by most Commonwealth and ex-Commonwealth nations upon being granted independence.
This system has Parliamentary privilege, which allows the legislature to discuss any issue it deems relevant, without fear of consequences.
After Ghana gained independence in 1957, the country practiced the Westminster system of governance from the year of independence to 1960.
The Minority leader is of the firm believe that Ghana should revert to this system of governance to allow Parliament scrutinize pertinent national issues.
He noted that in Ghana currently, “politics is becoming monetized” recalling that, in the lead up to election 2012, politicians spent huge sums of money on campaigning. “…just one billboard was priced at Ghc9,500 so almost Ghc10,000. The President had many more in my constituency and mine is a very compact constituency. The President cannot finance this himself and people will come in to assist, some of them for free, but nobody is into politics as a father Christmas so they expect the President to payback somehow after his election,” he remarked.
The Suame MP insisted that the time has come for Ghana “to revisit this and to see whether or not it will not be better for us to visit the Westminster way.”
He buttressed his point by pointing out that, “a study conducted indicating that emerging economies, especially the small unitary countries, are better off with Westminster systems than Presidential systems.”