Ghanaians against huge ex-gratia, Wednesday, February 16, 2011, Spread
RESPONDENTS in a research conducted by the Ghana Centre for Democratic Development (CDD-Ghana) have registered their displeasure with the practice of paying huge ex gratia to former presidents.
They were of the view that even though there was the need to reward former heads of state, the huge financial outlay involved in the payment of ex gratia could adversely affect the economy.
The findings, contained in a report titled, “The 1992 Constitution and Emoluments: Findings from a CDD-Ghana Study”, also revealed strong public sentiment against the lack of information on the salaries and allowances of Article 71 office holders, especially those of the President and Members of Parliament, even though their salaries were from the public purse.
The report indicated that persons who had some form of knowledge about the emoluments of those office holders had them through informal sources, such as the banks where those office holders took their salaries.
Article 71 of the 1992 Constitution provides a separate procedure for determining the emoluments and salaries of specific officer holders.
In giving legal effect to that article, various committees have been established over the years by successive governments to determine the quantum of emoluments and entitlements of those office holders specified under the said article.
Currently the 1992 Constitution is being reviewed, while a five-member committee, chaired by Prof Marian E. Addy, set up by President J.E.A. Mills is receiving inputs on the entitlements that should be paid Article 71 office holders.
It is in the light of these that the National Constitution Reform Coalition, in collaboration with CDD-Ghana, organised focus group discussions in Kumasi and Tamale on the emoluments of Article 71 public office holders and a follow-up public forum in Accra with the purpose of sharing the output from the two sessions and also gather information on the theme to be presented to the Presidential Emoluments Committee and the Constitution Review Commission.
Presenting the findings at a public forum in Accra, Prof Kwasi Prempeh, the Director of Governance and Legal Policy at CDD-Ghana, said contrary to views from Tamale, participants in the study in Kumasi were against the state giving any house to a former president, saying a person elected as President should be responsible enough to plan his or her future after his or her term of office.
Another view on the matter was that an ex-President could be provided with accommodation which must revert to the state after his or her demise.
The study also found that the public was against the present system where the President approved the emoluments of MPs and vice-versa.
There was consensus that the Fair Wages and Salaries Commission (FWSC), which is in charge of harmonising public sector salaries and wages, should be given the mandate to determine the emoluments of all Article 71 office holders.
The study also found out that some people were against the payment of lump sums of money to a former president for the purpose of establishing a foundation but had support for a partial state funding for a particular cause chosen by a former president.
Participants in the study rejected the practice of paying sitting presidents per diem on the basis that the president’s travel expenses were fully catered for by the state, hence there was no need to further burden the taxpayer.
On the salary of a sitting president, there was the call for a relative link between the minimum wage and the salaries of the president and Members of Parliament.
The research also got unfavourable response to the idea of public office holders purchasing their official residences after leaving office, with the suggestion being that each constituency and ministry should be allocated a house in order not to give purchase options to their occupants.
They were of the view that even though there was the need to reward former heads of state, the huge financial outlay involved in the payment of ex gratia could adversely affect the economy.
The findings, contained in a report titled, “The 1992 Constitution and Emoluments: Findings from a CDD-Ghana Study”, also revealed strong public sentiment against the lack of information on the salaries and allowances of Article 71 office holders, especially those of the President and Members of Parliament, even though their salaries were from the public purse.
The report indicated that persons who had some form of knowledge about the emoluments of those office holders had them through informal sources, such as the banks where those office holders took their salaries.
Article 71 of the 1992 Constitution provides a separate procedure for determining the emoluments and salaries of specific officer holders.
In giving legal effect to that article, various committees have been established over the years by successive governments to determine the quantum of emoluments and entitlements of those office holders specified under the said article.
Currently the 1992 Constitution is being reviewed, while a five-member committee, chaired by Prof Marian E. Addy, set up by President J.E.A. Mills is receiving inputs on the entitlements that should be paid Article 71 office holders.
It is in the light of these that the National Constitution Reform Coalition, in collaboration with CDD-Ghana, organised focus group discussions in Kumasi and Tamale on the emoluments of Article 71 public office holders and a follow-up public forum in Accra with the purpose of sharing the output from the two sessions and also gather information on the theme to be presented to the Presidential Emoluments Committee and the Constitution Review Commission.
Presenting the findings at a public forum in Accra, Prof Kwasi Prempeh, the Director of Governance and Legal Policy at CDD-Ghana, said contrary to views from Tamale, participants in the study in Kumasi were against the state giving any house to a former president, saying a person elected as President should be responsible enough to plan his or her future after his or her term of office.
Another view on the matter was that an ex-President could be provided with accommodation which must revert to the state after his or her demise.
The study also found that the public was against the present system where the President approved the emoluments of MPs and vice-versa.
There was consensus that the Fair Wages and Salaries Commission (FWSC), which is in charge of harmonising public sector salaries and wages, should be given the mandate to determine the emoluments of all Article 71 office holders.
The study also found out that some people were against the payment of lump sums of money to a former president for the purpose of establishing a foundation but had support for a partial state funding for a particular cause chosen by a former president.
Participants in the study rejected the practice of paying sitting presidents per diem on the basis that the president’s travel expenses were fully catered for by the state, hence there was no need to further burden the taxpayer.
On the salary of a sitting president, there was the call for a relative link between the minimum wage and the salaries of the president and Members of Parliament.
The research also got unfavourable response to the idea of public office holders purchasing their official residences after leaving office, with the suggestion being that each constituency and ministry should be allocated a house in order not to give purchase options to their occupants.
Comments
Post a Comment