NDC, NPP agree to engage religious bodies, CSOs in eliminating vigilantism
The New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC) have agreed to commence a discussion on the elimination of vigilantism with other key stakeholders and experts.
The representatives shall include representatives of Civil Society Organisations, Security Agencies and religious bodies.
This was captured in a communiqué signed by Chairmen of both NDC and NPP, Samuel Ofosu Ampofo and Freddie Blay respectively as well as the Chairman of a dialogue by both parties on Monday, SKB Asante.
“After an open and exhaustive deliberation, the parties agreed on the immediate scope of the dialogue. In this regard, the parties agreed to commence a discussion on the elimination of vigilantism with other stakeholders and experts. These stakeholders shall include representatives of Civil Society Organisations, Security Agencies and religious bodies.”
Today’s [Monday] meeting will be the second after an initial meeting held three weeks ago.
The first meeting generated a lot of controversy with the parties accusing each other of bad faith.
The General Secretary of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) Asiedu Nketia expressed disappointment in the outcome of the first meeting.
Speaking on Eyewitness News after the meeting earlier in April, Asiedu Nketia said his expectations were not met because the NPP and NDC could not agree on the scope of discussion.
“Generally the summary of my impression is that I was disappointed about the outcome of the meeting,” he said.
But the Director of Communications of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Yaw Buabeng Asamoah, on the other hand, threatened a halt in the ongoing discussions saying the General Secretary of the NDC was acting in bad faith.
He contended that the decision of the latter to put a spin on talks that were held behind closed doors in the public domain was in breach of the rules of engagement.
“How can an eminent politician like Asiedu Nketia go round saying things that indeed I can just say is an interpretation of his own facts. I will not breach the trust except to say that if he continues that way, he will break the trust,” he said.