The executive branch in Ghana has always wielded excess power as against the other 2 branches (Judiciary & the Legislature). In that context, by-passing parliament as per the Constitutional Review Committee is a breach of th ... read full comment
The executive branch in Ghana has always wielded excess power as against the other 2 branches (Judiciary & the Legislature). In that context, by-passing parliament as per the Constitutional Review Committee is a breach of the constitution. The Judiciary needs to stop it.
John Naawu 9 years ago
You claim that "this right is capsuled in the legal maxim “Everything which is not forbidden is allowed" and capsules the essential freedoms of the ordinary citizenry. But the converse principle — "everything which is not ... read full comment
You claim that "this right is capsuled in the legal maxim “Everything which is not forbidden is allowed" and capsules the essential freedoms of the ordinary citizenry. But the converse principle — "everything which is not allowed is forbidden" — applies to public authorities whose actions are limited to the powers explicitly granted to them by law.
To initiate, consider and propose amendments to the constitution are all implied in this intrinsic freedom of the people."
You are missing Asare's argument. According to him, the CRC and CRIC are not just some high school students engaged in debate on the constitution. Rather, he correctly see them as State Actors who have no powers except those granted to them.
The power to make constitutional amendments, including the implied powers that come with the express power, having been granted to parliament CANNOT be assumed by the President through the establishment of various commissions and committees.
Methinks Asare has made a brilliant case. Whether the Atugubas of the world can understand what he is saying though is an entirely different question.
Kofi Ata, Cambridge, UK 9 years ago
Unfortunately, I missed this article yesterday so did not comment. Dr SAS has made some good points. However, he failed to sufficiently address Prof Asare’s concerns about the Executive initiating the process and cheery pic ... read full comment
Unfortunately, I missed this article yesterday so did not comment. Dr SAS has made some good points. However, he failed to sufficiently address Prof Asare’s concerns about the Executive initiating the process and cheery picking to suit its interest/s and that fact that if this is allowed to continue the constitution run the risk of being at mercy of Executive. I believe the confusion has risen from the Presidential and Parliamentary hybrid system that Ghana has adopted. It’s obvious that by this arrangement, it has been the Executive arm of governance that drafts bills and sends them to the Legislature for debate and approval prior to the President giving his ascent to become Act/law.
From this practice, Dr SAS is of the view that there is nothing wrong with the Executive following what is customary or established practice. If that is the case, then he is wrong because the intent of the framers of constitution was for Parliament and not the Executive to initiate the process by drafting the necessary bill/s to amend the constitution. This is explicitly so by the requirement on Parliament to send the bill/s to the Council of State for advice prior to its first reading by Parliament. Thereafter, it must be gazetted for six months and should not be passed until after the referendum. All these orders are directed at the Legislature and not the Executive. If it were for the Executive to initiate the processes by drafting the bill/s, then clause 25 (2) would have read, the Executive/President and not Parliament shall send the bill to the Council of State. I am not a lawyer but that is my understanding of the letter of the Constitution and not the spirit.
Dr SAS is also wrong to assume that the Executive President is or can exercise his rights as an ordinary citizen. That is never true because the President is never and cannot be an ordinary citizen of the state. The only citizen that is immune from prosecution whilst in office.
EBBY 9 years ago
Your arguments here don't hold any water. Mahama, as the president and representative of the executive branch of the government, is excluded from initiating any constitutional amendment bill. The intent of the framers of the ... read full comment
Your arguments here don't hold any water. Mahama, as the president and representative of the executive branch of the government, is excluded from initiating any constitutional amendment bill. The intent of the framers of the constitution was to prevent a situation like this when a president can initiate constitutional changes in order to arrogate extra powers to the executive branch. As citizens of the nation, we have to rise up and prevent the supreme court from "atugubalizing" the contitution to suit the whims and caprices of the president. I rest my case.
Odurose 9 years ago
"atugubalizing", that is a good one. I hope lexicographers will take note of this neologism and accord it the prominence it deserves in the development of Ghanaian jurisprudence as per our Supreme Court.
On the substantive ... read full comment
"atugubalizing", that is a good one. I hope lexicographers will take note of this neologism and accord it the prominence it deserves in the development of Ghanaian jurisprudence as per our Supreme Court.
On the substantive issue of amending the Constitution, my sympathies are with Prof Asare's position rather than with those of Dr SAS. The latter cleverly labours his points and argues too much in the abstract but Prof Asare anchors his points on the provisions of the Constitution and only by "atugubalizing" the constitutional provisions will the Supreme Court come to Dr SAS's position. That will be the thin end of the wedge to bring about a presidential usurpation of the constitutional rights of Parliament.
Yaw Ohemeng 9 years ago
Dr SAS, I wonder why you failed to take account of Article 289 of Chapter 25, which says:
289
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, Parliament may, by an Act of Parliament, amend any provision of this Const ... read full comment
Dr SAS, I wonder why you failed to take account of Article 289 of Chapter 25, which says:
289
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, Parliament may, by an Act of Parliament, amend any provision of this Constitution.
(2) This Constitution shall not be amended by an Act of Parliament or altered whether directly or indirectly unless -
(a) the sole purpose of the Act is to amend this Constitution; and
(b) the Act has been passed in accordance with this Chapter.
Thus the beginning of Chapter 25 explicitly says who can carry out amendments - PARLIAMENT.
Maybe you have not followed what has taken place thus far. The Executive set up the review committee; it then came out with a white paper to alter the recommendations of the Review Committee. Where have the people's wishes been respected?
I will say the law throws up some quirks from time. Do not pre-empt what the Court might or might not say.
Felix Quaynor 9 years ago
So called Doctor SAS is completely wrong. As you posted, Article 289 (1) says, "Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, Parliament may, by an Act of Parliament, amend any provision of this Constitution."
This mea ... read full comment
So called Doctor SAS is completely wrong. As you posted, Article 289 (1) says, "Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, Parliament may, by an Act of Parliament, amend any provision of this Constitution."
This means exactly what it says. It does not mean the President should set up Commissions to bring amendments to Parliament.
GENERAL DeGAULE 9 years ago
Which Parliament? We have a hybrid Political system which is part Presidential like the US and part Parliamentary like the UK. In the US model Congress as the Legislature is responsibly for initiating all legislation with th ... read full comment
Which Parliament? We have a hybrid Political system which is part Presidential like the US and part Parliamentary like the UK. In the US model Congress as the Legislature is responsibly for initiating all legislation with the exception of what the President proposes in his annual State of the Union address to both Houses of Congress. Other than that all the entire legislative proposals commences in Congress, and one can talk about the independence of the Legislature. With the Parliamentary system, the cabinet comprises, Members of Parliament elected by their constituencies and the executive has one foot in the legislature and are entitled to vote in the House. The entire legislative agenda is initiated and driven by the Executive with the exception of the private members bill which happen to be very few and often times are filibustered. Even though the vote in Parliament suffices as legislation passed by the Legislature, in truth that agenda is the party's manifesto and pledges executed by the Executive.
Our hybrid system is neither here nor there and it does not have the sophistication of the legislative process found in the US Congress. And the President does not have the Prime Ministerial burden of turning up in Parliament. The Constitution was written for JJ Rawlings to escape that challenge.
The clause which says only Parliament can propose changes to the constitution is just a hanging and loose clause. It does not detail or address the procedural matters. The US Constitution being an an entrenched Constitution has detailed procedures involving 2/3rd approval. In the case of the United Kingdom with an unwritten Constitution, the Constitution evolves with primary legislation and European Union legislation.
In the end the constitution cannot be a strait jacket to suffocate us. It is obvious it needs a major overhaul and the only way forward is through the Constitutional Review Committee. Parliament as it currently stands has no incentive and no mechanism for reviewing the constitution
Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law 9 years ago
I think I quoted and fully discussed Chapter 25....
There is a clear difference between a bill and an act. A bill can get its input from all manner of sources. And its evolution into an act can transform it at every stage of ... read full comment
I think I quoted and fully discussed Chapter 25....
There is a clear difference between a bill and an act. A bill can get its input from all manner of sources. And its evolution into an act can transform it at every stage of the legislative process.
The Constitutional Review Commission's work so far consists in collating input from the populace. The government has also gleaned it and issued a white paper on it. At this stage, you could consider it as a bill in the works which can be parceled for parliament, although with the initiative of the Executive. I posit that there is nothing wrong with this. There is nothing wrong if the executive initiates or proposes amendments. No law proscribes this. But there will be everything wrong if the executive side-steps any of the procedures outlined in Chapter 25 and passes a bill without parliament.
You may re-read my submission for further clarity.
Yaw Ohemeng 9 years ago
I did not see you quote Article 289(1). But my take is that the Executive is seeing itself as having the final say by its conduct. If it was only acting to canvass views of citizens, it should just have done that and then pas ... read full comment
I did not see you quote Article 289(1). But my take is that the Executive is seeing itself as having the final say by its conduct. If it was only acting to canvass views of citizens, it should just have done that and then passed the report of the CRC, 'unedited' to Parliament. By issuing a White Paper, which watered down some of the contents, is what makes it unlawful.
Further, we cannot lose the context of the Ghanaian political situation. Where the majority in Parliament is of the same political colour as the Executive, Executive wish becomes Parliamentary wish. This is the danger in the whole issue.
The Executive could have provided the funds to Parliament to lead the amendment review. It could have submitted its own recommendations to Parliament. To wrap up everything and parcel it for Parliament, and with an NDC sympathetic Speaker, what else would Parliament add, before the divisions are called?
The Executive has not got good intentions, when it rejected the recommendation that MMDCEs should be elected. It is looking after its own interest. Parliament will never discuss this again against what the Executive want.
It is the suspected insincerity of the Executive that makes the review procedure as important as the review itself.
Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law 9 years ago
You should limit the discussion to the issue at bar. Has the executive done anything wrong so far? My answer is "no". What it is thinking of doing does not form a basis for suit. we have to wait for it to act ultra vires befo ... read full comment
You should limit the discussion to the issue at bar. Has the executive done anything wrong so far? My answer is "no". What it is thinking of doing does not form a basis for suit. we have to wait for it to act ultra vires before taking it on. That is how the law works. I cannot take you to jail for dreaming of murder.
The majority now in parliament is a lawful prerogative of the ruling NDC, and if a bill is properly passed by them, it will become the law of the land unless properly repealed.
You may not focus on the idealistic "what could or should have". Restrict yourself to what the law says and allows.
Felix Quaynor 9 years ago
The executive cannot canvas views for parliament. Constitutional amendment is a process involving canvassing views, drafting bills, providing notices, voting on bills, etc. all of that is part of the power of parliament and t ... read full comment
The executive cannot canvas views for parliament. Constitutional amendment is a process involving canvassing views, drafting bills, providing notices, voting on bills, etc. all of that is part of the power of parliament and the no go areas for the president.
This Dr. SAS believes the president is exercising his participatory right as a citizen when he uses executive instruments to initiate bills? What a big joke!
The president can talk about the ills of the constitution. But he cannot set up commissions to do something about it because it is a forbidden area.
Kweku 9 years ago
Why can't we Ghanaians learn to address people by their given names without any appellations?
Kwaku Asare filed his suit in his capacity as Kwaku Asare, not because he is Professor of something. For all you know, his profe ... read full comment
Why can't we Ghanaians learn to address people by their given names without any appellations?
Kwaku Asare filed his suit in his capacity as Kwaku Asare, not because he is Professor of something. For all you know, his professorship has absolutely nothing to do with the suit.
And Adjei Sarfo wrote this in his personal capacity, not because he is Doctor of Jurisprudence or whatever.
Why can't we dispense with all these titles and just address the substantive issues?
We have all come to Europe and north America where we got our professorships and doctorates and have seen that the people who awarded us these titles don't, themselves, go about flashing these titles at the drop of a hat.
Where I live, people will laugh at you if you go about calling yourself Dr this or Prof that unless in a strictly ceremonial academic context!
Yaw Ohemeng 9 years ago
Why do people hate it when people use their titles? What threat does it pose to you? The person has written an article giving a legal opinion. He is right to state his credentials to show that he is competent to write about t ... read full comment
Why do people hate it when people use their titles? What threat does it pose to you? The person has written an article giving a legal opinion. He is right to state his credentials to show that he is competent to write about the topic.
In formal settings and when you are writing for people who don't know you, there is nothing wrong with titles. It is not flashing, it is to show competence.
Of course when you are among friends, no one uses surnames, let alone titles.
Kweku 9 years ago
My brother, you know that's not the reason people use titles on ghanaweb. You are a Ghanaian and you know that our people love titles TO SHOW THAT THEY ARE BETTER THAN YOU (OR THE REST). That's what some of us hate.
And gh ... read full comment
My brother, you know that's not the reason people use titles on ghanaweb. You are a Ghanaian and you know that our people love titles TO SHOW THAT THEY ARE BETTER THAN YOU (OR THE REST). That's what some of us hate.
And ghanaweb is not the formal setting you're talking of, Yaw.
For that alone, I think I am living in a fantastic place where throughout my studies I was (and still am) on first name terms on my professors. And in Parliament, everyone is addressed by his given name - EVEN THE PRIME MINISTER!!!
Yaw Ohemeng 9 years ago
Being on first name basis with your professors I means that you know them. If your professor writes a newspaper article, I bet he will use his title.
I've not in my experience have anyone come to me to say hey I'm a profess ... read full comment
Being on first name basis with your professors I means that you know them. If your professor writes a newspaper article, I bet he will use his title.
I've not in my experience have anyone come to me to say hey I'm a professor and I demand respect. Maybe your experience is different from mine. I've rather most people I know being modest and level headed.
Those I know who show off happen to be people in positions they do not deserve. I will not defend politicians who use titles but they belong to the category of people in positions they do not deserve.
Kweku 9 years ago
BUT, my good friend Yaw, you will not deny the point that our people love titles tooooo much for the sole purpose of raising themselves above their fellow citizens. And this goes for even people who got those titles deservedl ... read full comment
BUT, my good friend Yaw, you will not deny the point that our people love titles tooooo much for the sole purpose of raising themselves above their fellow citizens. And this goes for even people who got those titles deservedly.
Perhaps where I live is a little bit special on this. Everybody calls everybody by his first name in the department. It has nothing to do with personal relationships. And when my professor writes an article in the newspapers he is NOT addressed as Prof. in the byline. At the end of the article, there may be a short note saying that so and so is a professor of so and so. Only one person in the present cabinet has a PhD degree. I bet you, not many people know that because nobody calls him by that.
Meanwhile everybody is talking seriously about the business of state which has nothing to do with people's titles... I luv it!!!
ALOSSMAN 9 years ago
Check the meaning of "suatre" in twi. Debrett"s the epitome of British etiquette tells us to address the Mayor of London as.Dear Mr Johnson.In Godforsaken Ghana you cannot address the mayor of Kumasi or some lickspittle asse ... read full comment
Check the meaning of "suatre" in twi. Debrett"s the epitome of British etiquette tells us to address the Mayor of London as.Dear Mr Johnson.In Godforsaken Ghana you cannot address the mayor of Kumasi or some lickspittle assemblyman without some honourable bullshit.Kwame Anthony Appiah,arguably the best Ghanaian professor, writes on Ghanaweb as plain Kwame Anthony Appiah.Food for thought.Mate!.He never brags about his academic pedigree,yet he is universally acknowledged as one of the best intellectuals in the 21st century..worldwide.
Yaw Ohemeng 9 years ago
If Prof. Kwame Anthony Appiah writes as plain himself, how did you know he is the best Ghanaian professor?Presumably somebody knew him as a Professor and even went on to assess him against other Ghanaian professors. It means ... read full comment
If Prof. Kwame Anthony Appiah writes as plain himself, how did you know he is the best Ghanaian professor?Presumably somebody knew him as a Professor and even went on to assess him against other Ghanaian professors. It means that Prof. Anthony Appiah might have signed himself as professor at some point in time and I bet people address him as Prof, wherever he is, and he turns his head in response.
To write with your title is no show off. To me it is to signal your competence to analys a certain topic
in depth. This to me is a very passive use. On the other hand if a person demand that thou shall call me Prof, then it is the 'in your face' that we all should abhor.
There is nothing 'sua tra' in this. I do not know what academic circles you wander in, but I know that formal titles is never frowned upon in academia. It is only in informal settings that they are dropped.
You mentioned 'Dear Mr Johnson'; is the 'Mr' not a formal title? The English rule is that even if you do not know someone on an informal basis, you cannot call them by their first names. I have had a letter, in which I signed with an electronic signature, returned to me, in the UK because the recipient was offended that I could not sign in ink. So do not misread the English and formality.
This is my view - how people choose to present themselves is a matter of choice. Either way there must be a purpose behind it other than flashing. I think we have to agree to disagree on this.
Kweku 9 years ago
Yaw, the point is NOT that people should not address themselves by their doctoral or professorial titles. You are arguing as if we are saying this should not be done.
You have said that in very formal situations, this is r ... read full comment
Yaw, the point is NOT that people should not address themselves by their doctoral or professorial titles. You are arguing as if we are saying this should not be done.
You have said that in very formal situations, this is required. No one will argue against that. Now, the discussions that go on on ghanaweb are no formal situations for telling us that you are a prof or a doc or whatever. Anybody who insists on doing that is doing it for reasons OTHER THAN SHOWING HE IS AN EXPERT IN THE FIELD (which he may not be). Yaw, you and I are Ghanaians and we know the reason these people are doing this on ghanaweb is simply to show off. Nothing else. That is what some of us are against. They write their titles in discussions of topics they know nothing about more than the next person.
Secondly, and more importantly, there is a tendency of us Ghanaians (and Africans and third worlders as a whole) to acquire and boast of titles. We want to be respected because of the title that we bear. We want people to see that our value as human beings is enhanced by the title that we bear. This is what some of us are against.
We have come to Europe and have seen other things. The titles of Doctorate and Professorship are European inventions copied by us in Ghana. Yet the Europeans themselves don't use them to "frighten" others the way Ghanaians do.
There are many commentators on ghanaweb who write very great arguments and discussions. Some of them have PhDs and are professors yet they do not tell you that! What about that? When these people write their academic papers to journals, their titles are accorded them in accordance with the journal's style sheet. That is what I call a formal situation where a title is a requirement. NOT GHANAWEB!
Yaw Ohemeng 9 years ago
Kweku neither of us is going to shift his stance, so let us agree to disagree.
Unless people write on Ghanaweb to adress trivial issues, then I cannot agree with you. If people are writing about serious issues, they have e ... read full comment
Kweku neither of us is going to shift his stance, so let us agree to disagree.
Unless people write on Ghanaweb to adress trivial issues, then I cannot agree with you. If people are writing about serious issues, they have every right to use titles or not to use them. It is a personal choice and I will not lose sleep over it.
I will only be concerned if someone writes, and then claims that because I am a professor, or doctor or Nana or whatever, you have got to take my views as given.
I know articles on Ghanaweb that I respond to and when I write I know the audience I am targeting.
For me, knowing the expertise people are bringing to a topic, helps me know the angle from which to respond. I can tackle someone on the surface of an article or the philisophy behind why an article argues what it argues.
I do not consider it as a showoff if someone quotes his title. I will not consider that he is looking down on me. I am rather happy that I can engage him on a higher plane to understand his stance better.
Kweku 9 years ago
You wrote:
"I will only be concerned if someone writes, and then claims that because I am a professor, or doctor or Nana or whatever, you have got to take my views as given."
I just say hmmmm. I am afraid, you've been h ... read full comment
You wrote:
"I will only be concerned if someone writes, and then claims that because I am a professor, or doctor or Nana or whatever, you have got to take my views as given."
I just say hmmmm. I am afraid, you've been had. I hate to think you don't know that cos I've been reading your comments and I think you're such a nice dude...
Kofi Nsia 9 years ago
The English confer the title "HON" to members of parliament not to mayors and assemblymen in town halls.So it is wrong for Kojo Bonsu and his henchmen to put HON.before their names.This is what i mean by "SUA TRA".You can che ... read full comment
The English confer the title "HON" to members of parliament not to mayors and assemblymen in town halls.So it is wrong for Kojo Bonsu and his henchmen to put HON.before their names.This is what i mean by "SUA TRA".You can check this on KMA website and all the 30 mayors of London.There is no problem with HON. Ken Agyapong,because he is a parliamentarian.The key point is why do they flaunt it during informal settings?Ghanaweb is hardly the "Fabian society".
Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law 9 years ago
I don't need to apologize for the use of an honorific title which I properly earned by dint of very hard work. Since when have you questioned the use of these titles by Kwame Nkrumah or Kwegyir Aggrey?
Shall I light my lamp ... read full comment
I don't need to apologize for the use of an honorific title which I properly earned by dint of very hard work. Since when have you questioned the use of these titles by Kwame Nkrumah or Kwegyir Aggrey?
Shall I light my lamp and put it under your bed? You or others may earn your own accolades and refuse to use them; that will be your right and make you less of a hypocrite. As for me, until death do I and my doctorate part. And you support my position by acknowledging that Ghanaians love their titles. I am a full-blooded Ghanaian, and I don't care what pertains in your little world. I love my title and will forever and ever append it to my name, especially now that I know that it gives you the jitters.
Odurose 9 years ago
But surely SAS even you should know that in the USA people with JD do not address themselves Doctor. Indeed even PhDs unless they are in strictly academic or professional situations do not address themselves Doctor. "Mr" is s ... read full comment
But surely SAS even you should know that in the USA people with JD do not address themselves Doctor. Indeed even PhDs unless they are in strictly academic or professional situations do not address themselves Doctor. "Mr" is strictly de riguer. I have not encountered any JD who is Attorney at Law addressing himself as a Doctor. You are of course an exception but then you are avowedly a Ghanaian who glories and revels in titles. Busumuru enjoy your title as long as you are aware that a JD is a minor doctorate.
Kofi Nsia 9 years ago
Nothing in that Goddamn constitution reflects the way of life or the cultural fabric of our nation.Copying British and American rule books and forcing them on us is the problem.My ancestors farmed on their land without any pa ... read full comment
Nothing in that Goddamn constitution reflects the way of life or the cultural fabric of our nation.Copying British and American rule books and forcing them on us is the problem.My ancestors farmed on their land without any paper work for centuries,now some blockhead comes in and tells me to prove my ownership of that very land.What sort of nonsense is that?Our series of common law thrown out of the window for an alien concept.Constantly arguing over English.Lets rip that book up now!
Kosoko 9 years ago
You made a brilliant point there but SAS here would beg to differ. He always think Whiteman way of doing things (culture) is universal and always frown on African way of doing things as wayward. He is deeply into the impositi ... read full comment
You made a brilliant point there but SAS here would beg to differ. He always think Whiteman way of doing things (culture) is universal and always frown on African way of doing things as wayward. He is deeply into the imposition of European culture as universal. Its implications are irrelevant to him as long as he is comfortable with his role in his perceived universal culture at the expense of his own people. He does not in a second believe that culture is a geographic specific--emanating from historical and environmental experiences to the needs of specific society and that plurality of cultures can exist side by side.
Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law 9 years ago
I am surprised that you agree with a gentleman that advocates the abolition of our land tenure system and the ripping apart of our sacred constitution. In effect, the gentleman is advocating that we revert to the state of nat ... read full comment
I am surprised that you agree with a gentleman that advocates the abolition of our land tenure system and the ripping apart of our sacred constitution. In effect, the gentleman is advocating that we revert to the state of nature, and you are tagging along with him.
Your glib agreement with this noxious logic confirms my assertion that every relevant culture worthy of adherence is necessarily universal, and will be validated and accepted by every society as perennial. If a cultural device is not so recognized, then it is not so relevant.
To test my hypothesis, mention any single Ghanaian cultural practice. If it is important, then it is also accepted everywhere. For example, is hospitality an important Ghanaian cultural practice? The answer is yes, so every society accepts hospitality as a virtue, and never as a vice! Hence the universality of hospitality.
If a section of Ghanaians were to accept ethnocentricity as a cultural practice, this practice would be frowned upon insofar as it does not coalesce with the universal standard.
Thus my contention that all significant cultural practices are essentially universal insofar as they are virtuous.
Kosoko 9 years ago
Kofi Nsiah, there we go. This is from the man himself. I told you!
Kofi Nsiah, there we go. This is from the man himself. I told you!
Kofi Nsia 9 years ago
Kosoko,pass this on to the learned Dr, SAS. A lovely quote from Walter Scott.1771-1832.It is the pest of our profession[LAW] that we seldom see the best of human nature.Did our Akan land tenure system worked well before the A ... read full comment
Kosoko,pass this on to the learned Dr, SAS. A lovely quote from Walter Scott.1771-1832.It is the pest of our profession[LAW] that we seldom see the best of human nature.Did our Akan land tenure system worked well before the Alien rule book was imposed on us? Did our forefathers take it kindly when the Brits wanted to turn our lands into so-called "Crown Lands".That said,Oliver Holmes summed it up "If you can eat sawdust without butter,you can be a success in law.Let us keep what we think is good for us and model own own rule book accordingly and stop photo-copying theirs.Is this too much to ask? Bolivia, has giving two fingers to all the bureaucratic nonsense by allowing ten year olds to work on farms.It suits them.
Kofi Nsia 9 years ago
Uganda does not see homosexuality as virtuous, yet the West sees it as universal standard,and they are penalizing them for their point of view through trade sanctions. That debunks your contention "that all significant cultur ... read full comment
Uganda does not see homosexuality as virtuous, yet the West sees it as universal standard,and they are penalizing them for their point of view through trade sanctions. That debunks your contention "that all significant cultural practices are essentially universal insofar as they are virtuous.
Felix Quaynor 9 years ago
The President issuing an executive instrument to initiate a draft of a bill in an area reserved for parliament can only happen in the land of ignorance. And this doctor thinks the president's illegal action is equal to ordina ... read full comment
The President issuing an executive instrument to initiate a draft of a bill in an area reserved for parliament can only happen in the land of ignorance. And this doctor thinks the president's illegal action is equal to ordinary citizens debating? Tweaaa.
Only a non-lawyer will think that a President using executive instruments is just participating as a citizen or fail to understand that initiating a bill is a criticak aspect of lawmaking.
The executive branch in Ghana has always wielded excess power as against the other 2 branches (Judiciary & the Legislature). In that context, by-passing parliament as per the Constitutional Review Committee is a breach of th ...
read full comment
You claim that "this right is capsuled in the legal maxim “Everything which is not forbidden is allowed" and capsules the essential freedoms of the ordinary citizenry. But the converse principle — "everything which is not ...
read full comment
Unfortunately, I missed this article yesterday so did not comment. Dr SAS has made some good points. However, he failed to sufficiently address Prof Asare’s concerns about the Executive initiating the process and cheery pic ...
read full comment
Your arguments here don't hold any water. Mahama, as the president and representative of the executive branch of the government, is excluded from initiating any constitutional amendment bill. The intent of the framers of the ...
read full comment
"atugubalizing", that is a good one. I hope lexicographers will take note of this neologism and accord it the prominence it deserves in the development of Ghanaian jurisprudence as per our Supreme Court.
On the substantive ...
read full comment
Dr SAS, I wonder why you failed to take account of Article 289 of Chapter 25, which says:
289
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, Parliament may, by an Act of Parliament, amend any provision of this Const ...
read full comment
So called Doctor SAS is completely wrong. As you posted, Article 289 (1) says, "Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, Parliament may, by an Act of Parliament, amend any provision of this Constitution."
This mea ...
read full comment
Which Parliament? We have a hybrid Political system which is part Presidential like the US and part Parliamentary like the UK. In the US model Congress as the Legislature is responsibly for initiating all legislation with th ...
read full comment
I think I quoted and fully discussed Chapter 25....
There is a clear difference between a bill and an act. A bill can get its input from all manner of sources. And its evolution into an act can transform it at every stage of ...
read full comment
I did not see you quote Article 289(1). But my take is that the Executive is seeing itself as having the final say by its conduct. If it was only acting to canvass views of citizens, it should just have done that and then pas ...
read full comment
You should limit the discussion to the issue at bar. Has the executive done anything wrong so far? My answer is "no". What it is thinking of doing does not form a basis for suit. we have to wait for it to act ultra vires befo ...
read full comment
The executive cannot canvas views for parliament. Constitutional amendment is a process involving canvassing views, drafting bills, providing notices, voting on bills, etc. all of that is part of the power of parliament and t ...
read full comment
Why can't we Ghanaians learn to address people by their given names without any appellations?
Kwaku Asare filed his suit in his capacity as Kwaku Asare, not because he is Professor of something. For all you know, his profe ...
read full comment
Why do people hate it when people use their titles? What threat does it pose to you? The person has written an article giving a legal opinion. He is right to state his credentials to show that he is competent to write about t ...
read full comment
My brother, you know that's not the reason people use titles on ghanaweb. You are a Ghanaian and you know that our people love titles TO SHOW THAT THEY ARE BETTER THAN YOU (OR THE REST). That's what some of us hate.
And gh ...
read full comment
Being on first name basis with your professors I means that you know them. If your professor writes a newspaper article, I bet he will use his title.
I've not in my experience have anyone come to me to say hey I'm a profess ...
read full comment
BUT, my good friend Yaw, you will not deny the point that our people love titles tooooo much for the sole purpose of raising themselves above their fellow citizens. And this goes for even people who got those titles deservedl ...
read full comment
Check the meaning of "suatre" in twi. Debrett"s the epitome of British etiquette tells us to address the Mayor of London as.Dear Mr Johnson.In Godforsaken Ghana you cannot address the mayor of Kumasi or some lickspittle asse ...
read full comment
If Prof. Kwame Anthony Appiah writes as plain himself, how did you know he is the best Ghanaian professor?Presumably somebody knew him as a Professor and even went on to assess him against other Ghanaian professors. It means ...
read full comment
Yaw, the point is NOT that people should not address themselves by their doctoral or professorial titles. You are arguing as if we are saying this should not be done.
You have said that in very formal situations, this is r ...
read full comment
Kweku neither of us is going to shift his stance, so let us agree to disagree.
Unless people write on Ghanaweb to adress trivial issues, then I cannot agree with you. If people are writing about serious issues, they have e ...
read full comment
You wrote:
"I will only be concerned if someone writes, and then claims that because I am a professor, or doctor or Nana or whatever, you have got to take my views as given."
I just say hmmmm. I am afraid, you've been h ...
read full comment
The English confer the title "HON" to members of parliament not to mayors and assemblymen in town halls.So it is wrong for Kojo Bonsu and his henchmen to put HON.before their names.This is what i mean by "SUA TRA".You can che ...
read full comment
I don't need to apologize for the use of an honorific title which I properly earned by dint of very hard work. Since when have you questioned the use of these titles by Kwame Nkrumah or Kwegyir Aggrey?
Shall I light my lamp ...
read full comment
But surely SAS even you should know that in the USA people with JD do not address themselves Doctor. Indeed even PhDs unless they are in strictly academic or professional situations do not address themselves Doctor. "Mr" is s ...
read full comment
Nothing in that Goddamn constitution reflects the way of life or the cultural fabric of our nation.Copying British and American rule books and forcing them on us is the problem.My ancestors farmed on their land without any pa ...
read full comment
You made a brilliant point there but SAS here would beg to differ. He always think Whiteman way of doing things (culture) is universal and always frown on African way of doing things as wayward. He is deeply into the impositi ...
read full comment
I am surprised that you agree with a gentleman that advocates the abolition of our land tenure system and the ripping apart of our sacred constitution. In effect, the gentleman is advocating that we revert to the state of nat ...
read full comment
Kofi Nsiah, there we go. This is from the man himself. I told you!
Kosoko,pass this on to the learned Dr, SAS. A lovely quote from Walter Scott.1771-1832.It is the pest of our profession[LAW] that we seldom see the best of human nature.Did our Akan land tenure system worked well before the A ...
read full comment
Uganda does not see homosexuality as virtuous, yet the West sees it as universal standard,and they are penalizing them for their point of view through trade sanctions. That debunks your contention "that all significant cultur ...
read full comment
The President issuing an executive instrument to initiate a draft of a bill in an area reserved for parliament can only happen in the land of ignorance. And this doctor thinks the president's illegal action is equal to ordina ...
read full comment