I concede – Godfred Dame tames Haruna Iddrisu in heated exchange over procurement provisions
Per Sammy Gyamfi’s own admission, the ongoing vetting of ministerial nominees is not just a mere question and answer exercise for the Members of Parliament on the ticket of the National Democratic Congress, but part of a grand plot by the party to expose what they believe to be infractions caused by some of the nominees in the first term of President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo where they served as ministers.
A careful observation of the process will make one realize that the minority MPs have unsurprisingly asked more questions than their colleagues on the other side.
Their questions as revealed by Sammy Gyamfi points to the direction of a coordinated plan to bring to the fore some happenings that occurred in the first four years of the Akufo-Addo government.
So far, they have been successful in reigniting conversations about the expenditure of the covid-19 funds and the contract between the Government of Ghana and Frontier Health Services for the administration of COVID-19 testing at the Kotoka International Airport.
When Attorney General and Minister-designate for Justice, Godfred Dame, appeared before the committee on Friday, he faced 94 questions, 71 of which were asked by Minority MPs in an exercise that travelled over six hours.
One of the topics that were extensively discussed was the issue of sole-sourced contracts supervised by the Public Procurement Authority where he served as a board member.
The discussion on the PPA was led by Minority Leader Haruna Iddrisu, who in total asked 26 questions.
Haruna took Godfred Dame on the path of the PPA where he suspected some infractions occurred.
Haruna and Godfred Dame went on an intellectually stimulating question and answers exercise that ended with the former admitting to not having sufficient knowledge on that specific subject matter.
The two men clashed over some provisions in the PPA Act 2003 which was amended in 2016. Haruna insisted that Section 38 does not have two clauses, Dame thought otherwise which set them on a collision course.
Below is the conversation
HarunaThe 38 does not have one. With all due respect learned Attorney General, A, Section 38 of Act 663 has no one. It has 38, A, B, C. I have a copy here and I will share mine with you. Section 38 does not have a 1.
Dame: Mr Chairman, the law has been amended and there is now a 38(1) and 38(2). I have a copy because I’m a member of the PPA board. You are misleading …. The law was amended in 2016 before this was written.
Haruna Section 38, the Public Procurement Amendment, is it a further amendment to the 2016?
Dame It is the same 2016 which incorporated a subsection two. So the law now has two provisions, section 38(1) and section 38(2). I have the consolidated version.
Haruna Read your Act title, is it Act 914.
Dame The point I’m making is that Act 914 introduced an amendment which inserted a further subsection 2 into Section 38. Therefore Section 38 should be construed to have two subsections.
Haruna I’m fine, you are Attorney-General so you are privy to it. Give me the date of the gazette of the one you are holding. I have 12 May 2016.
Dame It’s the consolidated Act 663 and in it, you’ll see that.
Haruna> I concede