Cash for seat saga: NPP MPs compromised the truth – NDC MPs

Members of the Minority National Democratic Congress (NDC) serving on the Adhoc Committee that was set up to probe the alleged cash for seat saga have revealed that they took the decision to write their report separate from what has been laid on the floor of the Parliament because their colleagues from the Majority New Patriotic Party (NPP) compromised the truth.

In the view of Dr. Dominic Ayeni and James Klutse Avedzi, since the conclusion of deliberations their colleagues from the NPP had already made up their minds and glossed over key ethical issues, they had no option than to write a separate report that reflects the true findings of the Committee.

“The Majority, in our view, deviated from this responsibility in many respects by its interpretation of the facts”, the separate report released by the NDC MPs on Friday, February 2, 2018, in part read.

The Majority Leader, Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu, on Thursday, February 1, 2018, revealed to journalists that the NDC MPs serving on the five-member Adhoc had served notice to the Minority Leader, Haruna Iddrisu that they want to write their separate report.

He could however, not give any reason why Dr. Dominic Ayeni and James Klutse Avedzi decided to part ways with the rest of the Committee members.

But the duo in their report revealed that some of their findings and conclusions drawn by the Majority NPP members on the Committee came nowhere close to the reality on the face of the facts that were presented to them.

Below is an excerpt from the 32-page report filed by the Minority NDC MPs detailing the reasons why they decided to write a separate report:

 

REASONS FOR FILING OF MINORITY REPORT

 

The Minority Members of the Committee participated diligently in the deliberations of the Committee but decided to file a separate report in dissent. This decision was not taken either lightly or in haste. First of all, at the conclusion of deliberations, it became patently clear that the Majority Members of the Committee had made up their minds about the issues of fact and the conclusions to be drawn from the evidence adduced before the Committee. As would be made clear in the remainder of this Report, some of the findings made and conclusions drawn by the Majority Report come nowhere close to a dissemblance of reality. These findings and conclusions were against the overall weight of the evidence placed before the Committee. Indeed, as a tribunal of fact, the Committee had a responsibility not only to Parliament but to the entire people of Ghana to ensure that whatever it put out was absolutely consistent with the facts on record. The Majority, in our view, deviated from this responsibility in many respects by its interpretation of the facts.

Secondly, the Majority Report glosses over a number of critical ethical and legal issues raised by not only the proponent of the Motion but also by the Committee itself during the course of its deliberations. Some of these legal and ethical matters were also discussed widely within the public sphere a consequence of the wide media coverage that the sittings of the Committee received. Matters such as the possible forgery of documents designed to deceive the Committee, possible violations of foreign corrupt practice legislation and international conventions by the involvement of the foreign businesses in this scheme and fraudulent misrepresentations relating to the benefits of the awards scheme have all been glossed over by the Majority. As part of its mandate to investigate related relevant matters, the least the Committee could have done in this regard, would have been to examine these matters and to objectively explain why they are either not related or relevant. We deem this not to be in consonance with the constitutional mandate of parliamentary committees as watchdogs over the affairs of ministries, departments and agencies of state.

 

قالب وردپرس

Comments