Former First Deputy Speaker of Parliament, Joseph Osei-Owusu, has confirmed that members of the Appointments Committee receive financial support from the Chief of Staff after completing the vetting of nominees. However, he insists the payments do not amount to bribery.
Speaking on PM Express on Joy News, the former Bekwai MP, who also chaired the committee, defended the practice, arguing that it was a means of facilitating their work and had no bearing on the approval process.
“Yes, indeed. I told [Manasseh Azure] that when I joined the Appointments Committee, at the end of our work, the Chief of Staff would provide money to members of the committee. It was meant to facilitate our work,” Osei-Owusu explained to host Blessed Sogah. “I don’t see how anyone could interpret that as bribery.”
Bribery Allegations and Reputation Concerns
Expressing frustration over unfounded accusations in Ghana, Osei-Owusu lamented how easily allegations are made without proof.
“In this country, the easiest thing to do is throw out allegations. People make claims, but when you ask for evidence, they struggle to provide any,” he remarked.
Referring to a past bribery controversy in 2017, he recalled how he was accused—alongside other MPs—of accepting bribes during the vetting of a ministerial nominee.
“I had a long meeting with the leadership and decided I had to go to court because I was certain that Mahama Ayariga and the others had made baseless claims against me,” he recounted.
According to Osei-Owusu, the allegations were later traced back to a claim made by then Chief Whip Muntaka Mubarak, who ultimately denied them.
Response to Manasseh Azure’s Claims
The discussion was reignited following claims made in journalist Manasseh Azure’s book, which suggested that MPs receive money after vetting nominees.
“Somebody forwarded a Facebook post about it to me, so I reached out to Azure. After I sent him a message, he called me and told me that if I had read the book, I would understand the context,” Osei-Owusu said. “It’s unfortunate how facts are stretched and given interpretations that have nothing to do with reality.”
When asked whether such payments could influence decisions, he dismissed the notion, stating, “This happens after the work is done. How does it create any advantage or disadvantage for anyone? It’s unfortunate how people distort facts.”
Domelevo Disagrees, Calls for an End to the Practice
Former Auditor General Daniel Yaw Domelevo, who was also on the show, strongly opposed the practice, describing it as inappropriate and calling for its immediate abolition.
“It’s very disappointing to hear my colleague Joe Wise say that the Chief of Staff used to give them money after their work,” he said.
Domelevo questioned why Parliament would receive funds from the Chief of Staff when it has its own allocated budget.
“Does this mean Parliament falls under the budget of the Chief of Staff? Are MPs not given their own resources?” he asked.
He further argued that such payments could compromise the integrity of Parliament’s work.
“If we know that after completing a task, we will receive extra money, it affects how we approach the work. That is influence peddling,” Domelevo asserted. “If this is true, then it must stop immediately.”
Heated Debate on Parliamentary Independence
The revelation has sparked widespread debate about the independence of Parliament and whether financial incentives—
SOURCE: Abubakar Ibrahim
Join our WhatsApp channel: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VakDz4u9RZATWh53yC1a
