Time to fix Ghana parliament to be fit for purpose

The calls for constitutional reforms to strengthen parliament to make it independent of the executive arm of government must go along with a focus on how to deal with the monetization of politics and poor stewardship that continues to weaken the country’s parliamentary democracy.

Discussions that focuses on just reforms alone may not be enough to make parliament an institution capable of delivering political goods to citizens.   

Currently, the Fourth Republican Constitution of Ghana provides for a hybrid system of governance, through the appointment of majority of ministers of state from parliament, in contrast to the previous third republican constitution, where ministers were exclusively chosen from outside parliament to enforce strict separation of powers between the legislative and the executive arms of government.

Both systems of governance have advantages and disadvantages and therefore a lot of consideration would have to go into any constitutional review to strengthen parliament by hastening slowly.

However, more needs to be done deliberately to address some of the underlying issues that continue to weaken parliament as an institution due to extreme partisan politics, poor leadership and stewardship, among other issues.

The recent chaotic scenes, near-fists fights and deteriorating  politics that characterized the previous eighth and the current ninth parliament, are just symptoms of what is eroding confidence in Ghana’s parliament and members of parliament (MPs).

Mere constitutional reforms and structural changes to parliament may just not be enough to strengthen parliament.

It is important to improve upon some of the politics and processes that result in the election of MPs, to ensure that  legislators are accountable to the people and capable of serving the interests of citizens. Political power and positions are fast becoming auctioned goods with the highest bidders being elected as MPs.

The rigorous winnowing processes needed by political parties, civil society organizations and even ordinary citizens to scrutinize parliamentary candidates to help with the separation of the chaff from the grain so that only the best candidates get to serve in parliament has over the years been weakened, leading to the election of quite a number of self-serving MPs with profit and grasp for political power in mind.

It is no wonder that parliamentary candidates pump lots of cash into campaigns during primaries held within political parties and at the general elections, contributing to the weaponization and monetization of the country’s democratic process.

Thus, primaries and general elections are becoming a war front, fragmenting political parties and the entire nation. The sad outcome of these is the poor leadership that sometimes manifests when people end up in parliament to serve as MPs.

Gradually, Ghanaians are losing sight that parliament is a representative organ of state, meant to reflect that it is a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Parliamentary elections are gradually becoming non-democratic by the “hand-picking” of rich parliamentary candidates. Some of these candidates openly display their ill-gotten wealth and still get elected.

The outcome is that some of these MPs who get elected, end up showing little interest in serving the people, because they are just in to gain political power, fleece the people and enjoy the perks and privileges that come with their new status.

Whatever constitutional reforms are on the table for scrutiny to strengthen the legislature, must also focus on dealing with some of these underlying issues that undermine the proper functioning of parliament.

Profit-making by some MPs at the expense of work in parliament and ineffective service to constituents is gaining grounds and contributing to the weakening of work in parliament and service to the people.

On June 10, 2025,  Speaker Alban Bagbin addressed some of the issues in relation to the constitutional and procedural requirements relating to offices of profit, to ensure that MPs do not short change parliament.

In a formal statement during proceedings in parliament, he stated that he had noticed that “it has become a practice that MPs, ministers and deputy ministers, accept appointments to various boards, committees, and external positions, many of which carry remuneration or other benefits, without seeking the permission of the speaker, as required by the constitution and the standing orders of parliament.”

Beyond these appointments, he said there is also a growing pattern of members actively engaging in private business ventures and professional undertakings that raise legitimate concerns about interference with the proper discharge of their public functions.

According to him, while some of these appointments may be validly made by operation of law or arise from constitutional designation, a significant number fall outside these narrow exceptions. And that this trend, if left unchecked, risks eroding the ethical standards of public service, weakening parliamentary oversight, and compromising the credibility of parliament in the eyes of the public.

Mr. Bagbin  pointed out that restrictions placed on MPs and ministers of state from holding offices of profit or emolument in addition to their official duties are rooted in long-established constitutional principles to protect the integrity of public office, preserve institutional independence, and guard against the corrosive effects of conflict of interest.

He stated that the underlying rationale is that public office must be held in undivided service to the state.

“Where a person charged with legislative or executive responsibility accepts another position that offers personal benefit, whether financial or otherwise, it becomes necessary to examine whether such dual engagement undermines their official obligations or introduces the risk of divided loyalty,” he explained.

“The rule also serves a practical purpose. The work of a minister or MP is demanding and time-consuming. Holding additional appointments, especially those with financial or executive obligations, raises legitimate concerns about whether such individuals can adequately perform their primary duties. Where these appointments are accepted without scrutiny or oversight, there is the additional risk that state boards, corporate entities, or regulatory agencies become politicized, and accountability mechanisms are compromised or weakened or both,” Mr. Bagbin added.

He explained that the prohibition against holding an office of profit or emolument applies broadly. It covers any position, appointment, or role that confers financial benefit or material advantage on MPs, ministers, deputy ministers, whether in the public or private sector, and whether held directly or through an intermediary.

The speaker, noted that despite the clarity of the constitutional and procedural requirements, he had noticed with “concern that a number of MPs, some ministers and deputy ministers, have accepted appointments, as a practice, to various boards, advisory roles, and external offices of profit without seeking or obtaining the required prior permission of the House.”

He issued a warning to the MPs that moving forward, he would enforce strict compliance with the constitutional and procedural requirements, adding that parliament cannot afford to compromise on the principles of public trust, accountability, and institutional integrity.

The question is why do people pay huge sums to become MPs? Ghana’s democracy is under threat and parliament may continue to grow weaker and weaker, as political positions, privileges and perks are on the table for sale. And it is only the rich that can afford to pay, regardless of character, integrity and motive of these people.

Ghana’s multiparty democracy, just like many others in Africa, is leaving out a large majority of citizens out of their fair share of the benefits of democracy, due to some extent, the type of political leadership that fails to put principles at the heart of political power and service to the nation.  

Just like what Nigerian political scientist, Cyril I. Obi said in a paper titled “No choice, but democracy: prising the people out of politics in Africa?”

In his paper, he delivered a poor verdict on the new and poor leadership that has taken over the democratic enterprise in Africa, after so many years of military take overs.

Obi’s paper was presented in 2008 to the Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University and Nordic Africa Institute, Uppsala in Sweden, as part of the “Claude Ake Memorial Papers. ”

He examined the move of African countries from military rule to multiparty democratic rule in the late 80s,  with  high expectations that democracy would reverse decades of poverty, corruption and underdevelopment.

He contends that multiparty democracy in the continent has been for the affluent and the powerful, more a game of musical chairs in which various individual members of the political elite take their turns at the seat of power, but do not change the music.

He explains the growing loss of faith in a democracy that does not improve the quality of life of Africa’s people. While alienation and apathy are contributing to a non-transition to democracy.

Obi posits that it can be gleaned that the struggle for democracy in Africa has not ended, despite the triumph of multiparty in the 1990s.

“The issue is to return to the basics where people control power, so that Africans can enjoy the dividends of democracy.”

He noted that although Africans have largely been victims of hegemonic political class, it is also important to note the internal contradictions within the people themselves and how they are easily divided, and co-opted by narrow or diversionary elitists agendas.

According to him, how African people use the openings offered by multipartyism to take power over the democratic project will constitute the greatest challenge of the 21st century.

“But to return to democracy being the rule of the people, by the people, and for the people, will ultimately depend on the level of organization of grassroots or popular social forces and their struggles against those forces that under develop Africa,” he noted.  

As Ghana seeks ways to strengthen parliament through constitutional reforms, focus should also be on what to do about the sale of political power, which is not serving the interest of citizens.

It is time to pause, strategize and reset the country’s parliamentary democracy by critically looking at what is increasingly fueling partisan politics, the winner takes all mentally, the lust for political power, perks and the trappings.

Citizens must awake up from the type of politics being sold to them by the political elite, based largely on selfishness and party interests. 

By Eunice Menka

The post Time to fix Ghana parliament to be fit for purpose appeared first on Ghana Business News.