Franklin Cudjoe, Founding President of IMANI Africa, has defended the ministerial vetting process stating that almost all the relevant questions were asked.
He specifically praised the questioning style of Alexander Afenyo-Markin, the Deputy Majority Leader, saying he enjoyed the depth and relevance of his inquiries.
Cudjoe expressed appreciation for Afenyo-Markin’s approach during the vetting process, describing his questions as insightful and well-structured. “I enjoyed Afenyo’s questions,” he remarked, highlighting how the MP focused on essential governance and policy issues.
He further dismissed claims that the vetting process lacked substance, arguing that the core concerns of Ghanaians were indeed addressed. “I disagree with those who say the ministerial vetting did not capture essential areas of interest. Almost all the relevant questions were asked,” he emphasized on TV3’s The Key Points on Saturday, February 1.
Despite his defense of the vetting process, Cudjoe was also critical of how some Members of Parliament (MPs) handled the session. He observed that certain MPs used the platform for personal grandstanding rather than focusing on national priorities.
“You, members of Parliament, are representing us. All of us cannot go asking the nominees questions. So, you are supposed to get into our heads, get a sense of what is urgent, of importance to the people of Ghana, not just to yourself and to your ego per se, and to your little personal fights and grandstanding,” he said.
Cudjoe was also concerned about how national airtime was being wasted on trivial matters. He suggested that some of the personal and politically charged questions should have been addressed privately rather than in a public forum.
“Sometimes you look at them and you listen to their questioning, and I’m like, why don’t you do this in your private room? Why don’t you do this off the camera? Because we really don’t need the kind of diatribe,” he added.
Cudjoe also pointed to lapses in the way the vetting process was managed, particularly by the committee chairman. He argued that the chairman should have stepped in to maintain order when proceedings became chaotic.
“If you are chairing a very important and sensitive program or activity of this nature and it ends up in such chaos, I think it’s a very big problem,” he remarked.
He suggested that when the vetting process started to go off track, the chairman should have called for a break to restore order. “The committee chairman could have said, ‘Listen, the way things are going, I think we need a break. Can we take a break? Suspend certain discussions,’” he proposed.
Ministerial vetting is a crucial part of Ghana’s governance process, ensuring that nominees for key government positions are competent and fit for their roles.
https://editors.3news.com/news/government-sued-over-appointment-of-new-gra-boss/
