On Good Morning Ghana, Kwesi Pratt addresses two key issues. One was on the government that claims to hate taxes but loves democracy, and the other was about the Supreme Court.
Here’s what he said about the government that claims to hate taxes and love democracy:
All of a sudden, we are being told that this country cannot run without taxes. They told us that the taxes were too much. These same people woke up one day and said that without taxes, the country cannot be developed.
A phrase that keeps hitting me is, “no one in the world loves taxes and they always oppose taxation”. So, if you have to develop, don’t listen to the people; just impose the tax. That’s a strange statement coming from people who claim to believe in democracy.
They are trying to tell us that they are more sensible than the people they govern. The people’s mandate means nothing. We have gotten to a stage where the politicians are telling people they can’t think.
In all the polls I have seen, the most favorable for e-levy is 20%. In some cases, it was as bad as 98.5% against e-levy.
Here’s what he said about the Supreme Court:
I am worried about the Supreme Court’s decision because they were promised two doctrines. All official actions are presumed to be regular. The second is who suffers the most hardship.
The first doctrine presumed came first in 1789. Thus, no commoner could win a case against Kings. In 2022, our supreme is relying on the doctrine of 1789. I am shocked at the Supreme Court’s irregularities in Supreme Acts.
The Supreme Court on the second judgment states that the state will suffer irreparable hardship if e-levy is injuncted at that stage. We also argued that the people will suffer irreparable hardship if the e-levy is injuncted.
At some point, we are caught within a definition which sets the state apart from the people. Is it possible to have contention between the state and its people?
Here’s the link to the video https://youtu.be/juyTz_Du7uQ
Content created and supplied by: Jamal (via Opera
, . , . () , , , , , , , , . / , and/or . , , and/or , and/or