The Majority Leader, Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu, has aligned himself with President Akufo-Addo’s position on why he cannot endorse the Witchcraft and Ghana Armed Forces Bill.
In an interview with TV3’s Beatrice Adu on December 20, he stated, “I agree with the president on the financial toll argument.”
President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo provided additional reasons for his inability to assent to the Criminal Offences Amendment and the Ghana Armed Forces Bills.
Despite Parliament passing the bills on July 25, the President, in a letter to Parliament, cited financial implications on the consolidated fund as a key reason for not signing the bills.
The letter highlighted a thorough review of relevant constitutional legislative frameworks, specifically Article 108 of the Constitution and Section 100 of the Public Financial Management Act 2016, Act 921.
It emphasized that the bills, introduced as private member’s bills by Francis-Xavier Sosu, Member of Parliament for Madina Constituency, did not conform with constitutional provisions.
The bills, which avoid the death penalty and criminalize the activities of witch doctors, were deemed to retain substantial financial obligations on the Consolidated Fund and other public funds of Ghana.
“Upon a thorough review of the relevant constitutional legislative frameworks specifically Article 108 of the Constitution and Section 100 of the Public Financial Management Act 2016, Act 921, it is evident that the bill is introduced as private member’s bills by the honourable member of Parliament for Madina Constituency, Francis-Xavier Sosu do not conform with the provisions of the Constitution.
“These bills which avoid the death penalty and criminalise the activities of witch doctors retain substantial financial obligations on the Consolidated Fund and other public funds of Ghana due to the projected cost related to imprisonment, sustenance and healthcare for those who will be convicted under the days when they become law.”
“Therefore, in light of this significant fiscal impact, these bills should not have been introduced with the fiscal impact analysis. Access to such an analysis precludes these bills from being properly classified as private member’s bills. The legislative power entrusted to parliament comes with responsibilities to ensure that all enacted laws comply with the constitutional provisions safeguarding the nation’s fiscal integrity and avoiding the principles of governance.”
“Mr Speaker, it is for the above reasons that I, in preserving the sanctity of the legislative process refuse to assent with yours. I take this opportunity to reiterate my support for the contents of the bills and my intention for them to be reintroduced in Parliament on my behalf in due course. Yours sincerely, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo,” he stated.
These obligations include projected costs related to imprisonment, sustenance, and healthcare for those convicted under the proposed laws.
The President emphasized the significant fiscal impact, stating that the bills should not have been introduced without fiscal impact analysis.
Refusing to assent in order to preserve the sanctity of the legislative process, he expressed support for the bill’s contents and indicated his intention for them to be reintroduced in Parliament on his behalf in due course.
The President had initially raised constitutional concerns regarding the bills in a letter to Parliament on December 4.
The concerns revolved around the bills being introduced as private members’ bills rather than being presented by him or on his behalf. He emphasized the need to ensure that the bills are enacted in line with established constitutional and legislative processes.