'Lawyers in Search of Democracy' backs Anyidoho

We, the members of ‘Lawyers in Search of Democracy’- (LINSOD), a grouping of private legal practitioners in Ghana are utterly shocked and surprised at the reaction of the respectful institution of Parliament to the innocuous statement attributed to or allegedly uttered by Koku Anyidoho, the Director of Communications at the seat of government.

It is our advice to him, Koku Anyidoho, that he must resist any infringement on his right to free speech and also wish to assure him of our support anytime any day.

The statement or words which were authored by Mr. Anyidoho portraying the Minority Leader and the Minority Chief Whip as “irresponsible politicians” was in reaction to a statement by one of them that President J. E. A Mills must be impeached over the assertion by Mr. Kwame Pianim that he the President returned envelopes given or sent to him on two occasions.

Minority parliamentarians irked by the alleged statement and led by Mr. Ambrose Derry have made a formal complaint on the floor of the house necessitating the Speaker to refer the matter to the Privileges Committee in compliance with Standing Order 31 of the House.

LINSOD wishes to unreservedly express our misgivings at this reaction by Parliament.

We deem this reaction as one that goes overboard; a reaction if not checked, will turn Parliament into a monster which will at the end devour its democratic children. It will also encourage the suppression of the rights of Ghanaians to free speech instead of guaranteeing or protecting same.

There is no doubt in our minds that the Sovereignty of Ghana resides in the people of Ghana and not in Parliament or Parliamentarians.

The 1992 Constitution of Ghana nonetheless provides that no person should by his ACT or OMISSION impede Parliament or a Parliamentarian in the performance of his duty. This provision in the Constitution is meant to ensure that the work of Parliament is not unlawfully interfered with.

The Standing Orders of Parliament according to Article 110(1) of the Constitution are meant to regulate the procedure of Parliament. Other provisions under same relate to Parliament and Parliamentarians only. The order to drag anyone who does anything to bring Parliament to a situation of embarrassment or disrepute is a sanction on the conduct of Parliamentarians themselves to act and live above board. This procedure cannot call for a general application.

It is not meant as a tool to drag anyone who criticizes a Parliamentarian to appear before the Privileges Committee under the pretext of dragging the name of Parliament into disrepute except in extreme cases and not this one.

The Amoateng’s and others who through cocaine trafficking or fraudulent insurance deals as Members of Parliament and who drag parliament’s name into disrepute are the ones who must appear before the Privileges Committee. The Parliamentarians who approve of loans for the nation from Salons and Barber’s shops are the ones to be dragged to the Privileges Committee for dragging the good name of Parliament into disrepute.

Parliamentarians who allegedly received payments in dollars before passing the Vodafone Agreement are the ones to appear before the Privileges Committee of Parliament.

Let our august house, not abuse the rationale behind the provision for a Privileges Committee in the Standing Order of Parliament for the house and use it as a protective shield to the disadvantage of the citizenry. It is not an immunity concept.

The Constitution of Ghana guarantees freedom of speech to its citizens and Parliament comprising members such as Hon. Kofi Jumah, Hon. T. K. Hammond, Dr. Anthony Akoto Osei among others, who have themselves been apostles of expression of free strong speech must not show intolerance and must learn to accommodate others like Koku Anyidoho who might also express sentiments on issues less unpalatable than they do.

The Constitution allows Koku Anyidoho and others to speak their mind and respond to statements made by any person including a Member of Parliament at any given time, just as Parliamentarians also criticize the President, who is the highest authority in the land.

Parliamentary sovereignty is non-existent and to that extent any Member of Parliament who hides behind Parliamentary Privilege to insult a sitting President elected by majority of Ghanaians and is challenged by a Ghanaian should not take refuge under the Privileges Committee for revenge.

We think that the invitation extended to Koku Anyidoho is uncalled for and unnecessary and at best an aberration. It is an indirect re-enacting of the Criminal Libel Law and also an attempt to steal the right of freedom of expression from Koku Anyidoho.

Parliamentarians, NPP, NDC, PNC, or CPP are also Ghanaians and do not have or are not meant to enjoy any superior right over others. They, Koku Anyidoho and the President are all equal before the law.

We hereby wish to encourage Koku Anyidoho with this advice, that Parliament may disagree with what he says, but he must defend to death his right to say so.

To the Speaker, we hereby advise that on the resumption of Parliament, a second look must be taken at this request granted to refer Koku Anyidoho to the Privileges Committee so as not to make a laughing stock of Parliament and Parliamentarians before the generality of Ghanaians.

We must all learn to be our brother’s keeper. We must show tolerance. We must learn to take criticisms in good faith, and finally, Parliament and Parliamentarians themselves must show decorum in their actions and use of words. If they do so, then they can now stand on high moral grounds to criticize others who do not.

ISSUED BY LINSOD AND DATED TUESDAY 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009

CHRIS A-ACKUMMEY SPOKESPERSON