Professor Ranford Gyampo, a senior political science lecturer at the University of Ghana (UG), has stated that the 8th Parliament of the Fourth Republic cannot be taken seriously.
He described House members as “toothless” and incapable of performing their duties.
He recalled a fight that erupted between the MPs and lasted several hours, during which the violence began and ended.
Speaking on TV3, Prof Gyampo said “both sides do not really appreciate the mandate that was given to them by the people of Ghana.
“They don’t mean business and they are not to be taken seriously. They are more toothless than the predecessor institution that had clear dominance.”
His remarks follow the walkout by the majority on the censure motion against Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta.
The walkout was led by Majority Leader Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu, who stated that they could not be a part of a process that was unfounded and politically motivated.
KT Hammond, a co-chair of the ad hoc committee that investigated the allegations against Ofori-Atta, stated on the floor that they did not find a single piece of evidence to support the claims made against him.
Alexander Afenyo-Markin, the Deputy Majority Leader in Parliament, also justified the walkout.
He claimed that the Minority failed to exercise due diligence in its efforts to remove Ken Ofori-Atta.
“The 44-page report by the ad-hoc committee has no findings or recommendations. So on what findings are we going to prosecute the Minister? What are we doing? It’s much ado about nothing. It is political showmanship. Why attack someone’s reputation before gathering evidence? You have no proof, and you say we should take a vote on the person?” he asked.
Prof Gyampo, in response to the censure motion and the Majority walkout, chastised the New Patriotic Party (NPP) MPs for demonstrating a lack of political will to the extent that none of them today has the “courage to speak to the earlier position they expounded.”
He said “This Parliament cannot be taken seriously”.
Dr. Dominic Ayine, a co-chair of the ad hoc committee, insisted that they had “unassailable evidence” but were compelled to reach consensus on the motion.
