Biometric attendance system: a new era of accountability for Ghanaian MPs

Accra, Nov 12, GNA–For years, the issue of absenteeism in Ghana’s Parliament has remained a recurring concern among citizens, civil society groups, and parliamentary observers.  

Images of an almost empty Chamber during debates on key national issues have often sparked public criticism and raised questions about the commitment of some legislators to their constitutional duties. 

Against this backdrop, Speaker of Parliament Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin’s decision to fully implement a Biometric Attendance System for Members of Parliament (MPs) marks a significant step towards strengthening accountability and transparency in the legislature. 

Beginning with the Third Meeting of the Second Session of the Ninth Parliament, MPs will no longer sign a manual attendance register.  

Instead, attendance will be electronically captured through biometric verification, while legislators will also be assigned designated seats in the Chamber.  

The Speaker believes the initiative, together with plans for electronic voting, will help modernise parliamentary operations and improve the quality of legislative work. 

The move has generated interest among Ghanaians, many of whom view it as a long-awaited reform aimed at ensuring that lawmakers are present to represent the interests of their constituents. 

Parliamentary absenteeism is not a new phenomenon in Ghana. Over the years, concerns have been raised by Speakers, Majority and Minority leaders, as well as civil society organisations, over low attendance during plenary sittings. 

Several instances have seen proceedings delayed or suspended because the House failed to meet the minimum quorum required to conduct business. On some occasions, debates on important national policies have taken place before sparse attendance, attracting criticism from the public and political commentators. 

Critics argue that absenteeism weakens parliamentary oversight, diminishes the quality of debate, and undermines citizens’ confidence in democratic institutions. 

Defenders of MPs often note that legislators perform multiple responsibilities outside the Chamber, including committee work, constituency engagements, ministerial duties, and official assignments. 

Nonetheless, many citizens maintain that attendance in the Chamber remains a fundamental requirement of parliamentary representation. 

The biometric attendance system is expected to eliminate disputes over attendance records and provide an accurate measure of MPs’ participation in parliamentary proceedings. 

By linking attendance to biometric verification, Parliament can establish a transparent database showing which legislators are present during sittings and how frequently they attend sessions. 

The designated seating arrangement announced by the Speaker is also intended to improve order and make attendance monitoring easier, while the planned electronic voting system will reduce errors and enhance efficiency in decision-making. 

Governance experts believe such technological reforms could encourage greater discipline among lawmakers and strengthen public trust in Parliament.  

Civil Society Perspective on the Initiative 

For instance, Dr Rasheed Draman, the Executive Director of the African Centre for Parliamentary Affairs (ACEPA), has long advocated stronger accountability mechanisms within legislatures across Africa. 

According to him, attendance is a basic indicator of parliamentary effectiveness because MPs cannot adequately perform their representation, law-making and oversight functions if they are absent from proceedings. 

The biometric system, he argues, could improve institutional credibility by providing objective attendance records rather than relying on self-reporting processes. 

Dr Draman believes the reform could deepen parliamentary democracy by enhancing transparency and making it easier for constituents to assess the performance of their elected representatives. When citizens can verify whether their MPs are regularly participating in parliamentary business, it encourages greater democratic accountability and strengthens the relationship between voters and lawmakers. 

He notes, however, that attendance alone should not become the sole measure of effectiveness. The quality of contributions made in debates, committee work and constituency engagement must also remain part of any comprehensive assessment of parliamentary performance. 

To gauge public sentiment, some Ghanaians shared their views on the initiative. 

“Taxpayers deserve value” 

Madam Afua Baduwa, a trader at Makola Market in Accra, welcomed the reform, saying MPs are elected and paid with public funds and should therefore be present whenever Parliament is sitting. 

“Many of usgo to work every day and our attendance is monitored. I think MPs should not be different. If the biometric system shows who comes to Parliament and who does not, it will help taxpayers know whether they are getting value for money,” she said. 

Ms Abena Frempong, a final-year student at the University of Ghana, believes the system could improve public confidence in Parliament. 

“Sometimes you see pictures of the Chamber and there are very few MPs around. Young people often feel disconnected from politics because they think leaders are not taking their responsibilities seriously. If attendance becomes more transparent, people may begin to trust Parliament more,” she noted. 

Mr Ibrahim Sulemana, a teacher in Kaneshie, argued that biometric monitoring must be backed by enforcement measures. 

“The technology is good, but it should not end with taking attendance. If an MP is repeatedly absent without a valid reason, there should be consequences. Otherwise, the system may not change behaviour,” he stated. 

Can Technology Alone Solve MPs’ Absenteeism? 

While many observers see the biometric attendance system as a positive development, some caution that technology alone cannot resolve all challenges facing Parliament. 

Institutional reforms, stronger enforcement of parliamentary rules, and greater public scrutiny will remain essential if the objective is to improve participation and effectiveness among legislators. 

The true test of the initiative will lie not merely in recording attendance but in whether it translates into fuller debates, improved oversight of the Executive, better legislation, and increased responsiveness to citizens’ concerns. 

For many Ghanaians, however, the reform represents an important signal that Parliament is willing to embrace modern tools in pursuit of greater accountability. 

As Parliament prepares to receive and scrutinise the Government’s 2027 Budget Statement and Economic Policy on  Thursday, November 12,2026, and subsequently consider hundreds of referrals, motions and questions during the meeting, citizens would be watching closely to see whether the new biometric system delivers a more active and responsive Parliament. 

If successful, the reform could become one of the most significant institutional changes in recent years, helping to strengthen public confidence in Ghana’s democratic governance and ensuring that elected representatives are present where citizens expect to find them: in the Chamber, participating in the business of the nation. 

Balancing Accountability with the Reality of an MP’s Job 

While many Ghanaians have welcomed the biometric attendance system, parliamentary observers caution against measuring an MP’s performance solely by attendance in the Chamber. 

Unlike employees whose duties are largely confined to an office, Members of Parliament operate in multiple spaces simultaneously. Beyond participating in debates and voting on legislation, MPs serve on parliamentary committees, undertake oversight visits to government institutions, attend caucus meetings, engage ministries on behalf of their constituents, and spend significant periods in their constituencies to address local development concerns. 

Committee work, often described as the engine room of Parliament, requires lawmakers to scrutinise bills, examine government expenditure, receive petitions, and conduct investigations. In many cases, committee meetings and field visits occur concurrently with plenary sittings, making attendance management a complex issue. 

Some MPs also hold additional responsibilities as ministers or deputy ministers and must balance executive duties with legislative obligations. 

Dr Rasheed Draman, Executive Director of ACEPA, has previously argued that while attendance is an important indicator of commitment, parliamentary effectiveness should be assessed more broadly to include an MP’s contributions to debates, committee participation, oversight activities, and responsiveness to constituents. 

For this reason, proponents of the biometric system emphasise that it should be viewed as a tool for improving transparency rather than a definitive scorecard on the overall performance of a legislator. 

Mr Joseph Mensah, a civil servant in Kumasi, shares that view. 

“Attendance is important because MPs are elected to represent us in Parliament. But we should also recognise that their work does not end when they leave the Chamber. Some are on committee assignments or solving problems in their constituencies. The biometric system should provide transparency, but it should not be used unfairly to judge an MP’s entire performance,” he said. 

Even so, governance experts maintain that regular presence in the Chamber remains non-negotiable because plenary is where laws are passed, government policies are scrutinised, and critical national decisions are taken. 

The challenge for Parliament, therefore, is to strike the right balance between recognising the diverse responsibilities of legislators and ensuring that absenteeism does not undermine the institution’s core constitutional functions. 

In that regard, the biometric attendance system may offer a more nuanced picture of parliamentary engagement. Rather than relying on anecdotal accounts or photographs of sparsely populated sittings, Parliament and the public will have access to verifiable records showing when MPs are present, absent, or engaged elsewhere on official parliamentary business. 

If properly implemented and complemented by broader performance assessment measures, the initiative could help foster a culture of accountability without overlooking the demanding and multifaceted nature of parliamentary service. 

Writer’s email: [email protected]