Otiko saga: Minority making a fuss – Lecturer

The Minority in parliament is “making a big issue out of the case” regarding the approval of Gender, Children and Social Protection Minister-designate Otiko Afisah Djaba over her failure to undertake national service, a political science lecturer at the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST), Mohammed Abass, has suggested.

“They can make a strong case out of this which is good and will be a signal to all of us so that moving on we will take these things seriously, but clarity is important… I don’t think [claims of] appointing her sending a wrong signal can be supported,” he told Class FM’s Emefa Apawu on Friday, February 3.

His comments follow the decision of Minority legislators on the Appointments Committee to vote against Ms Djaba’s approval, citing her inability to do national service as well as her posture during her vetting for their stance.

However, the Committee as a whole recommended Ms Djaba and five other ministerial appointees for approval by majority decision. This comes despite Ms Djaba’s refusal to apologise for describing former President John Mahama as “evil”, “wicked” and “an embarrassment” to people of the regions up north.

When the issue came up for discussion in parliament for a decision to be taken by the house, Minority Leader Haruna Iddrisu maintained that refusal to participate in a one-year service to the nation after her undergraduate studies at the University for Development Studies disqualified her from public service.

Mr Iddrisu said he was “referring to Act 426 section 7 of the Constitution”, adding: “It is also a national obligation. She, in her answers, was forthright and was candid with the committee that ‘I have not done national service’. Therefore, can she work in the public service of Ghana and hold the high office of a minister of state?”

Act 426 section 7 of the Constitutions deals with matters concerning persons liable to national service and instructs against employment contrary to the provisions of the Act.

It states:

“(1) A person who has not commenced and completed his period of national service shall not:

(a) obtain employment outside the Scheme; or

(b) be employed by any other person outside the Scheme; or

(c) be engaged in any employment outside the Scheme, whether self-employed or otherwise, without the prior permission, in writing, of the Board.

(2) It shall be the duty of every employer to ascertain from every employee, upon his appointment, whether or not he is liable to national service and if he is, the employer shall notify the fact to the Board forthwith.”

However, Mr Abass maintained: “There is lack of clarity here. As we stand here, nobody can clearly say that if you don’t do national service then you shouldn’t be given that position and nobody can say that the position be given to only those who have served the nation. It is a grey area and not clear; that is why there is controversy.”

For him, parliament “can give [her] the benefit of the doubt and then, henceforth, if anyone has not done national service the person will not be given such a position”.

He added: “It is a learning process; we are evolving and should not behave as if we are masters of all these things… If there should be any punishment it should be black and white, clearly stated.”