Minority in Parliament says the withdrawal of Speaker Alban Bagbin’s military attachment is a politically motivated action aimed to diminish his confidence.
According to the Minority, the calculated move is due to Mr Bagbin’s persistent bid to impartially and independently steer the affairs of the legislative arm of government.
Describing the move as shameful, the opposition accused the Akufo-Addo government of acting in bad faith.
“The minority shall hold the government of President Akufo-Addo responsible should the security of Rt. Hon Alban Bagbin, the speaker of Parliament be compromised in any way,” parts of the statement signed by Minority Leader, Haruna Iddrisu read.
This comes in the wake of a leaked document from the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF) directing the withdrawal of some 4 soldiers from the office of the Speaker because they were assigned there “without proper procedure.”
The GAF’s Chief of Staff, Maj. Gen. N. P. Andoh said WOII Apugiba Awine David, S/Sgt Agbley Prosper, WO1 Jafaru Bunwura and Sgt. Bonney Prince’s attachment to Mr Bagbin’s office since he assumed office on January 7, last year, is improper.
“It is humbly requested that the personnel are withdrawn with effect from 14 January 2022 while efforts are made to regularise their attachment,” the January 11 letter stated.
However, the lawmakers of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) ordered for the immediate withdrawal of the said letter.
The Minority further argued that there are members of the executive other than the President and Vice President who have at various times had soldiers attached to their offices.
Citing the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice; Godfred Dame and the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission Chairperson, Jean Mensah, the NDC Caucus questioned why soldiers providing security for the Speaker, whose status is above the mentioned executives.
“The only logical conclusion a reasonable mind would draw with respect to the failure of government to indicate the nature of the procedure supposedly breached by Mr Speaker’s outfit is that proper procedure was followed for which reason the military high command had no difficulty attaching the military personnel in question to his office.”