Pwamang Petition Closed: Kwakye Ofosu Reveals the Surprising Reason Mahama Was Only Informed

The Minister of State in charge of Government Communications, Felix Kwakye Ofosu, has clarified the status of the petition against Supreme Court Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie Pwamang, insisting that President John Dramani Mahama has only been informed about the matter.

According to Kwakye Ofosu, the Constitution does not require the President to be furnished with the details or rudiments of a prima facie determination before being notified about a petition.

He explained that the constitutional requirement should not be interpreted to mean that the President must receive the full details of the preliminary assessment conducted in connection with the petition.

In his explanation, Kwakye Ofosu stated: “The Constitution does not say that the President should be furnished with the rudiments of a prima facie determination. President Mahama has only been informed.”

The statement is intended to clarify the nature of the communication made to the President and address questions surrounding the constitutional procedure for handling the petition.

The issue has attracted attention because of the constitutional responsibilities assigned to the President in matters involving petitions against members of the judiciary.

Kwakye Ofosu’s clarification suggests that the President’s notification should be understood as a formal communication rather than an indication that he has received the full reasoning or details behind the preliminary determination.

The distinction is significant because constitutional procedures often prescribe specific responsibilities for the different institutions and officeholders involved in handling such petitions.

By emphasising that President Mahama has only been informed, the Minister appears to be drawing a line between notification and the provision of detailed information about the prima facie assessment.

The clarification also raises the importance of understanding the exact wording of the constitutional provisions governing petitions against judicial officers, particularly the stages involved and the responsibilities of the relevant authorities.

The government has maintained through Kwakye Ofosu’s explanation that the President’s role should be assessed within the requirements established by the Constitution, rather than assumptions about the information he must receive.

Meanwhile, the description of the petition as closed has added another dimension to public discussions surrounding the matter, although the specific procedural basis for that status remains important to understanding the development.

As attention remains on the petition against Justice Pwamang, Kwakye Ofosu’s comments provide the government’s explanation of what was communicated to the President.

His central message is that Mahama has been informed about the matter, but the Constitution does not require that he be furnished with the rudiments of the prima facie determination.

Nkansa Ophelia feedback-opera-news-app@opera.com