A Professor at the University of Ghana, Ransford Gyampo has accused President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo of adopting a dead goat syndrome attitude because he has finished his two terms in office.
In the view of Prof Gyampo, the time has come to legislate against ‘Presidential Dead-Goatism’.
Speaking on the Key Points on TV3 on Saturday, March 30, he said “The President appears to be telling Ghanaians that he’s exiting and hence he’s a dead-goat and doesn’t care about what anyone say or does. Even when the general will of the good people of Ghana has been resoundingly expressed against LGBT, the President seems to want to swim against the tide by resorting to surreptitious and disingenuous maneuverings just to undermine the will of the people.
“But we cannot allow a President to behave any how he pleases just because he’s exiting and so he’s a dead-goat. We must act on presidential dead-goatism before it overly frustrates Ghanaians and pushes unscrupulous people to act in an unorthodox manner.”
Professor Gyampo further said that the dismissal of the suit filed by South Dayi Member of Parliament Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor against the consideration of the new ministers does not automatically mean the ministerial nominees should be approved.
“It is not a marching order to act on the ministerial nominees of the president,” he said.
“Parliament is superior to the executive arm…President Akufo-Addo has a nation to govern and so the responsibility lies on him to act in a manner that shows cooperation because if the hung parliament decides to frustrate the government we will all suffer,” he added.
On Wednesday, March 27 the Supreme Court dismissed an injunction application filed by Dafeamekpor against Parliament’s approval of ministerial nominees by President Akufo-Addo.
By a unanimous decision, the apex Court said the injunction application is frivolous and an abuse of the court process.Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor had filed an injunction restraining Parliament from vetting and approving new ministers as well as reshuffled ministers given various portfolios. He was praying the court to deem the action by President Akufo-Addo as unconstitutional.
President Akufo-Addo on February 14, 2024 had announced a reshuffle consisting of 13 ministers and 10 deputy ministers being relieved of their post, while 6 of them were reassigned into various portfolios.
On Wednesday, March 27, 2024, when the case was called, the South Dayi Member of Parliament as well as his lawyer, Nii Kpakpo Samoa Addo were both absent.
Events took an interesting twist when the five-member panel chaired by the Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkonoo stood down the hearing for about 10 minutes to ascertain the details of documents submitted by the court bailiff.
The bailiff had indicated that in his quest to serve court processes to the Speaker of Parliament (1st defendant) and Rockson Nelson Dafeamekpor (Plaintiff) the latter had refused service.
Joshua Benning narrated to the court that a hearing notice and affidavit in opposition documents which were sent to the law firm of representatives of Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor were rejected because “an order had been made by the lawyer Nii Kpakpo Samoa Addo not to receive any service”
The Chief Justice then ordered for the hearing of the case to progress after the bailiff confirmed that the Speaker of Parliament had duly been served and he had also left the court documents at the premises of the plaintiff’s lawfirm.
Attorney-General Godfred Dame then described actions by the plaintiff’s lawyer as the highest form of disrespect to the apex court and as professional misconduct and called for the dismissal of the suit.
Responding to the suit, Thaddeus Sory, counsel for the Speaker of Parliament also opposed to the injunction application citing that it did not satisfy the requirements for an injunction to be granted.
Ruling on the matter, the apex court dismissed the injunction application by Rockson Nelson Dafeamekpor with the reason that the suit was against minister nominees whose names have not been submitted.
Mr Godfred Dame further said “It is unheard of for a lawyer who has filed an application in the matter to reject the direction and the processes that have been filed by the other side.
“It is really for me, a gross professional misconduct. Be that as it may, the court proceeded to deal with the matter and that is it. I think it was very unfortunate especially as the same counsel was in the same day filing processes in the Supreme Court of Ghana earlier in the morning It was rejected the processes from the Supreme Court of Ghana and in the afternoon he proceeded to file processes in the same Supreme Court of Ghana.
“I think the processes of the highest court of the Republic ought to be respected, and the dignity and authority of the court always ought to be protected and respected by all
that the dismissal of the suit filed by South Dayi Member of Parliament Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor against the consideration of the new ministers does not automatically mean the ministerial nominees should be approved.
“It is not a marching order to act on the ministerial nominees of the president,” he said on the Key Points on TV3 on Saturday, March 30.
“Parliament is superior to the executive arm…President Akufo-Addo has a nation to govern and so the responsibility lies on him to act in a manner that shows cooperation because if the hung parliament decides to frustrate the government we will all suffer,” he added.
On Wednesday, March 27 the Supreme Court dismissed an injunction application filed by Dafeamekpor against Parliament’s approval of ministerial nominees by President Akufo-Addo.
By a unanimous decision, the apex Court said the injunction application is frivolous and an abuse of the court process.Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor had filed an injunction restraining Parliament from vetting and approving new ministers as well as reshuffled ministers given various portfolios. He was praying the court to deem the action by President Akufo-Addo as unconstitutional.
President Akufo-Addo on February 14, 2024 had announced a reshuffle consisting of 13 ministers and 10 deputy ministers being relieved of their post, while 6 of them were reassigned into various portfolios.
On Wednesday, March 27, 2024, when the case was called, the South Dayi Member of Parliament as well as his lawyer, Nii Kpakpo Samoa Addo were both absent.
Events took an interesting twist when the five-member panel chaired by the Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkonoo stood down the hearing for about 10 minutes to ascertain the details of documents submitted by the court bailiff.
The bailiff had indicated that in his quest to serve court processes to the Speaker of Parliament (1st defendant) and Rockson Nelson Dafeamekpor (Plaintiff) the latter had refused service.
Joshua Benning narrated to the court that a hearing notice and affidavit in opposition documents which were sent to the law firm of representatives of Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor were rejected because “an order had been made by the lawyer Nii Kpakpo Samoa Addo not to receive any service”
The Chief Justice then ordered for the hearing of the case to progress after the bailiff confirmed that the Speaker of Parliament had duly been served and he had also left the court documents at the premises of the plaintiff’s lawfirm.
Attorney-General Godfred Dame then described actions by the plaintiff’s lawyer as the highest form of disrespect to the apex court and as professional misconduct and called for the dismissal of the suit.
Responding to the suit, Thaddeus Sory, counsel for the Speaker of Parliament also opposed to the injunction application citing that it did not satisfy the requirements for an injunction to be granted.
Ruling on the matter, the apex court dismissed the injunction application by Rockson Nelson Dafeamekpor with the reason that the suit was against minister nominees whose names have not been submitted.
Mr Godfred Dame further said “It is unheard of for a lawyer who has filed an application in the matter to reject the direction and the processes that have been filed by the other side.
“It is really for me, a gross professional misconduct. Be that as it may, the court proceeded to deal with the matter and that is it. I think it was very unfortunate especially as the same counsel was in the same day filing processes in the Supreme Court of Ghana earlier in the morning It was rejected the processes from the Supreme Court of Ghana and in the afternoon he proceeded to file processes in the same Supreme Court of Ghana.
“I think the processes of the highest court of the Republic ought to be respected, and the dignity and authority of the court always ought to be protected and respected by all