data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/72d78/72d78bb6702b32113c33ed609095dc36af02aad1" alt=""
Joseph Osei-Owusu, former First Deputy Speaker of Parliament and ex-Chair of the Appointments Committee, has acknowledged that members of the committee receive money from the Chief of Staff after vetting ministerial nominees. However, he insists that the payments are not bribes but rather a form of facilitation to support their work.
Speaking on Joy News’ PM Express on Wednesday, Osei-Owusu defended the practice, stating that the funds are provided after the committee’s work is completed and are not intended to influence decisions. “Yes, indeed. I told him (Manasseh Azure) that when I joined the Appointments Committee, most of the time, at the close of our work, the Chief of Staff would bring money to the members of the committee. It’s like facilitating our work,” he explained. “I wonder how anybody could link that to bribery?”
The former Bekwai MP expressed frustration over what he described as the casual manner in which allegations are made in Ghana without evidence. “The easiest thing in our country is throwing about allegations. Often, people will just say things, and when you ask them to provide the evidence, they are found wanting,” he lamented. He referenced past bribery allegations in 2017, when MPs Mahama Ayariga and others accused him of being involved in bribery during the vetting of a ministerial nominee. Osei-Owusu denied the claims, stating that he sought vindication through a meeting with parliamentary leadership and considered legal action to clear his name.
Osei-Owusu also addressed claims made in journalist Manasseh Azure’s book, which suggested that MPs receive money after vetting. He maintained that the payments are not improper and do not influence the committee’s decisions. “Somebody forwarded that Facebook thing to me. So I contacted Azure, and he called me. He said that if perhaps I had read the book, I would see the difference,” he said. “It’s unfortunate how we stretch facts and give explanations or interpretations that have nothing to do with reality.”
When questioned whether the payments could be seen as influence peddling, Osei-Owusu dismissed the notion, arguing that the funds are provided after the committee’s work is done. “This is after the work. How can that bring an advantage to anybody? What gives a disadvantage to anybody? So it’s a pity how we can stretch facts,” he said.
However, former Auditor General Daniel Yaw Domelevo, who was also on the show, strongly disagreed with Osei-Owusu’s defense of the practice. Domelevo described the payments as problematic and called for an immediate end to the practice. “It sounds very unfortunate for me to hear from my colleague Joe Wise say that the Chief of Staff used to bring them money after their work,” he remarked. “Does it mean Parliament falls under the budget of the Chief of Staff? Are they not allocated their own budget?”
Domelevo argued that such payments could compromise the integrity of Parliament’s work. “I think that is not a good practice. If it happened, I think it has to stop. If we know that after doing this work, we will be remunerated, it influences the work that we are doing. So there is influence peddling there,” he asserted. “If it is true, then I think that practice must stop.”
The revelations have sparked a heated debate about the independence of Parliament and whether financial incentives, regardless of timing, can undermine the integrity of the vetting process. While Osei-Owusu maintains that the payments are harmless and meant to facilitate the committee’s work, critics like Domelevo argue that they create potential for undue influence and erode public trust in parliamentary processes. The controversy highlights ongoing concerns about transparency and accountability in Ghana’s governance systems.
Source: GhanaFeed.Com