A major controversy has erupted in Parliament as the Minority Caucus has firmly rejected the nomination of Justice Srem Sai as Deputy Attorney General. The decision comes after heated disputes during his vetting by the Appointments Committee Chair, a process the Minority described as abrupt and unfair.
Led by Alexander Afenyo-Markin, the Minority strongly opposed the manner in which the Chair of the committee handled proceedings, accusing him of bias and procedural misconduct. The abrupt termination of the nominee’s vetting session has intensified tensions, leading to a complete withdrawal of support for Srem Sai’s nomination.
Minority’s Protest Over Vetting Process
During the session, Afenyo-Markin vocally criticized the Chair’s decision to cut short the vetting, describing the move as “whimsical and capricious.” He argued that such actions undermined the long-standing spirit of cooperation that has characterized past vetting sessions.
“We are protesting your conduct in abruptly ending the nominee’s vetting on the grounds that I refused to withdraw my dissatisfaction with your ruling. I described your actions as whimsical and capricious, and I also noted that you rudely made those expressions. We do not think that, in the spirit of cooperation, you should put up such a posture,” Afenyo-Markin stated.
Beyond the issue of the vetting termination, the Minority also pointed to alleged biases in how proceedings were handled. They referenced a prior incident involving Ahmed Jerry Shaib, MP for Weija Gbawe, who they claim was also unfairly interrupted.
Tensions Escalate as Majority Accused of Obstruction
According to Afenyo-Markin, the Attorney General and the Majority Chief Whip disrupted the vetting process. He insisted that the Chair of the Appointments Committee ignored their interruptions, creating a double standard that further frustrated the Minority.
“The Attorney General himself interrupted, yet you curiously claimed you never heard him. Then the Majority Chief Whip also disrupted the session, though not into the microphone. This was clearly meant to obstruct the process. Eventually, you allowed him to ask a so-called follow-up question,” he lamented.
These events added to the Minority’s dissatisfaction, reinforcing their stance against the nominee.
Minority’s Response: A Rejection of All Nominees
As a direct response to the handling of the vetting session, the Minority has formally rejected Srem Sai’s nomination. In an even bolder move, they have decided to withhold support for all other nominees vetted on the same day.
Afenyo-Markin declared:
“Let me conclude as follows: the Minority Caucus hereby rejects the nomination of the Deputy Attorney General. That decision will be solely yours as a Majority Caucus. In furtherance of our protest, we are also rejecting all other nominees vetted today, and any decision taken will remain yours.”
This collective stance suggests a larger strategic move by the Minority to push back against what they perceive as an increasingly unfair and partisan process.
The Way Forward: A Warning from the Minority
With tensions running high, Afenyo-Markin warned that the Minority would reconsider its approach to future vetting sessions if such issues persist. He indicated that upcoming parliamentary proceedings, including President Mahama’s address, could be affected if the Appointments Committee continues to display perceived biases.
“God willing, tomorrow, we are receiving the President. Our understanding is that there will be no vetting on Friday. If this posture remains the same, we will advise ourselves on the next course of action,” he stated.
Political Reactions and Implications
The rejection of Justice Srem Sai’s nomination has sparked widespread reactions in political circles. While the Majority Caucus remains confident in its position, the Minority’s move has heightened tensions, setting the stage for further disputes.
Key figures from both sides have weighed in:
A source from the Majority dismissed the Minority’s protest, stating that their rejection of nominees would not hinder government operations.
Political analysts have speculated that this disagreement may lead to further deadlocks in parliamentary proceedings, particularly concerning future government appointments.
Conclusion: A Deepening Divide
The battle over Justice Srem Sai’s nomination reflects broader political divisions within Ghana’s Parliament. What began as a disagreement over a single nominee’s vetting has now escalated into a larger standoff between the Minority and Majority.
As the situation unfolds, both sides will need to navigate delicate negotiations to ensure that parliamentary processes remain functional and transparent. Whether this dispute will have long-term consequences for government appointments remains to be seen, but one thing is certain—the road ahead for the Appointments Committee is now more contentious than ever.
blogpay
Total Comments: 0