The Majority Chief Whip's Stance on the Ghana Bar Association's Constitutional Status
In a recent statement, the Majority Chief Whip in Parliament, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, addressed the controversy surrounding the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) and its potential removal from the 1992 Constitution. He firmly rejected the claims that the NDC is advocating for the GBA's exclusion, emphasizing that the association lacks any constitutional entitlement.
On January 18, 2025, Dafeamekpor shared his perspective on the matter via his X page. He clarified that the GBA is a voluntary professional organization and cannot claim constitutional status. The Whip's statement highlights the unique nature of the GBA's existence, which is derived from Article 21(1)(e) of the Constitution, rather than being explicitly mentioned within its pages.
Dafeamekpor's stance is particularly intriguing as he warns against any attempts to grant the GBA constitutional status, suggesting that such efforts would be futile. He argues that the Constitution is a dynamic document, capable of evolution, and thus, the GBA's perceived sense of entitlement is not justified.
This perspective is further supported by the criticism from former GBA President Yaw Acheampong Boafo, who views the CRC's recommendation to remove the GBA from the Constitution as politically motivated by the NDC. The debate surrounding the GBA's constitutional status raises important questions about the balance between professional associations' rights and the evolving nature of a country's legal framework.
This controversy invites discussion and invites readers to consider the implications of such a decision on the relationship between the legal profession and the state. What are your thoughts on the GBA's potential removal from the Constitution? Do you agree with the Chief Whip's stance, or do you believe there are valid arguments for the association's inclusion?
