Reinstate Okudzeto And Opare Hammond Now � NPP Committee

The Constitutional Committee has observed with concerns recent happenings in the New Patriotic Party (NPP). The interpretation and application of the NPP Constitution by certain officers of the party in the matter relating to the appointment of staff and purported termination of the appointment of some staff has also been of immense interest to the Committee. The Constitutional Committee is set up pursuant to article 9 B (b) of the NPP Constitution. Among the functions of the committee set out thereunder, the Committee is mandated by article 9 B (b) (ii) and (iii) to advise the National Council and National Executive Committee on the smooth operation of the Party�s Constitution and assist in the resolution of any conflict between the various organs of the Party in the implementation of the Party�s Constitution. The committee is also required to submit to the National Council and National Executive Committee proposals for the development and implementation of the Constitution. This opinion is in fulfilment of the constitutional duties of the Constitutional Committee and will, with the view to shedding light on the legal way forward, address the following: i.Who is responsible for the operations and management of the Party ii.Appointment of Deputy Communication Directors iii.Directives for certain officers to proceed on leave Who is responsible for the operations and management of the Party The framers of the NPP Constitution in a very clever fashion and with the view to avoid an over concentration of power in a single individual, officer or organ of the Party, contains a litany of provisions to ensure collaboration between a number of senior officers of the Party in the smooth operation and management of the Party. The very first organ which is accorded the responsibility of directing the affairs of the Party in between meetings of the National Delegates Conference is, the National Council. In this regard, the National Council is given the power to give such directives as may be necessary to the National Chairman. Please see article 9 B. In view of the composition of the National Council and because the National Council does not meet regularly (it is obliged to meet at least twice a year), article 9 (c) entrusts the National Executive Committee (NEC) with the duty of directing and overseeing the operations and activities of the Party. The NEC is subject to the directives of the National Council and meets at least once in every three (3) months. It would be noted that the composition of NEC itself demonstrates such a broad representation that it is impossible for one person to dominate in the matter relating to the administration of the Party. For the purpose of effectively administering the Party efficiently and effectively, the Constitution empowers NEC to form Sector Committees. The framers of the Constitution aware of the fact that NEC meets at least once every 3 months and may thus not be able to oversee the daily running of the Party�s affairs, specifically and in mandatory terms, addresses the question of who should have oversight of the daily management of the Party. Article 9 1 of the Constitution (page 50) clearly stipulates that the Steering Committee of the NEC shall be responsible for overseeing daily management of the Party and shall act on behalf of the Party on urgent matters. Again, the composition of the Steering Committee leaves no room for one individual to predominate or have an overbearing status in the daily management of the Party�s affairs. The Committee is of the view that in the daily running or organization of the Party, the Steering Committee has a pre-eminent role to play and cannot be sidelined or side-stepped. Any attempt to do so will amount to a violation of the Constitution or an usurpation of the constitutional duty of the Steering Committee. The Committee observes that the apparent conflict between some members of the NEC/Steering Committee on one side and the General Secretary on the other side, is attributable to a misconstruction of the duty of the General Secretary under article 9 F (iv) of the Constitution. Article 9 F(iv) stipulates that the General Secretary is responsible for overseeing the operations of the Party�s National Secretariat and coordinating the activities and operations of the Party and all employees of the Party at Constituency, Regional, External and National levels. The Committee cannot fathom how this responsibility to oversee the operations of the Party�s National Secretariat and coordinating the activities of the Party and its employees, can conflict with the power to oversee the daily management of the Party expressly granted to the Steering Committee of NEC by the Constitution. Neither can the Committee understand how this power given to the General Secretary, can amount to a power to appoint personnel and officers of the Party when the Constitution in a separate provision (which will be discussed below), explicitly provides for same. In plain terms, the combined effect of article 9 1 and article 9 F (iv) enjoins the Steering Committee to have general oversight responsible for the daily management of the Party whilst the direct supervision of the National Secretariat and coordination of the work of the employees is given to the General Secretary. It stands to reason that the General Secretary should be bound by directives of the Steering Committee of NEC (of which he is a member), and which is empowered by NEC and the Constitution to be in charge of the daily management of the Party. In point of fact, article 9 F(iv) categorically states that the General Secretary shall perform his duties in accordance with the directives of the NEC. If the Steering Committee is an organ of NEC and is responsible for the daily management of the Party, it goes without saying that the General Secretary is bound by directives of the Steering Committee (of which he is part). This becomes more obvious when consideration is made of the fact that a construction of all the various provisions of the Constitution referred to above, points to a clear intention of the framers to avoid devolution of power onto one person or officer.