The Programmes Officer at CDD-Ghana, Madam Vera Abena Addo, has bemoaned that the Parliament of Ghana is becoming legalistic, which is not helping. She first provided insightful commentary on the recent parliamentary vetting process.
“The parliamentary approval is important to consolidate our democracy, and it also enhances our vertical and horizontal accountability.”
Madam Vera Abena Addo, Programmes Officer CDD-Ghana
According to Ms. Addo, the involvement of parliament in vetting nominees ensures that public interest is safeguarded, as the process is transparent and accessible to all through media broadcasts. Ms. Addo raised concerns about time management when vetting ministerial appointees. She advised;
“We have to be more efficient – maybe we can look at time allocated to one nominee and how much time a member is expected to spend with the nominee.”
Madam Vera Abena Addo, Programmes Officer CDD-Ghana
Ms. Addo noted that some members of parliament do not ask any questions, especially those from the majority, while others dominate the process, leading to inefficiencies.
To improve the vetting process, Ms. Addo proposed the formation of sector-specific vetting committees. She added;
“Parliament has different kinds of people with different expertise based on that, they are either put on one committee, either select Committee or standing committee. Maybe we can look at that approach as well.”
Madam Vera Abena Addo, Programmes Officer CDD-Ghana
By having experts conduct the vetting, the process could become more focused and productive. She also suggested the possibility of parallel vetting sessions to expedite the process. She observed; “Parliament has also become a bit more legalistic. It’s as if you are in court, you are before a judge.”
Ms. Addo expressed concern that the legalistic nature of the questioning sometimes turns the vetting into a cross-examination rather than a constructive dialogue.
This approach, she argued, might be beneficial for detecting dishonesty but can overshadow the primary objective of assessing the nominees’ capabilities and ideas.
Balancing Accountability and Constructive Dialogue
Ms. Addo acknowledged the importance of accountability but emphasized the need for balance. She noted; “When there’s so much of [legalistic questioning], we don’t get to hear solutions from the nominees.’’
To this effect, she stressed that the vetting process should provide a platform for nominees to present their ideas and solutions, which can then be interrogated constructively.
Ms. Addo highlighted the importance of making the vetting process comprehensible to the public. She asserted;
“The parliament is representing constituents an it’s important that we all will be able to appreciate the questions that the parliamentarians are asking and how we can follow.”
Madam Vera Abena Addo, Programmes Officer CDD-Ghana
She advocated for the use of plain language and avoidance of abstract absurdities to ensure that the process is accessible and understandable to all citizens.
Commenting on the dynamics between the chairman and the ranking member during the vetting process, Ms. Addo observed some tension. She remarked;
“They started a bit on a rough note – I was hoping that the two of them will agree because this is parliamentary job, and it’s no longer minority versus majority.”
Madam Vera Abena Addo, Programmes Officer CDD-Ghana
Ms. Addo called for better coordination and collaboration, emphasizing that the vetting process should transcend partisan divides and focus on the national interest.
Ms. Vera Abena Addo’s reflections on the parliamentary vetting process provide a comprehensive analysis of its strengths and areas for improvement.
Her suggestions for sector-specific vetting, efficiency enhancements, and a balanced approach to questioning could significantly enhance the process.
By prioritizing transparency, public engagement, and constructive dialogue, the vetting process can better serve its purpose of ensuring competent and accountable governance.
READ ALSO; Edward Abambire Bawa Appointed Acting CEO of GNPC
