Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin has issued an apology to Gifty Jiagge-Gobah, Clerk of the Appointments Committee, following his recent outburst during a vetting session. His apology comes after a heated exchange in which he accused the Clerk of bias and procedural lapses, leading the Minority to demand her resignation over alleged unprofessional conduct.
During the vetting process, Afenyo-Markin and his colleagues in the Minority expressed concerns about what they described as Jiagge-Gobah’s partiality in handling the proceedings. They alleged that she displayed open allegiance to the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC), a move they claimed compromised the neutrality of the committee’s work. The situation escalated as opposition MPs led by Afenyo-Markin insisted that her actions threatened the credibility of the vetting process, making her position untenable.
However, following calls for calm and a plea for reconciliation by Adaklu MP and Minister for Roads and Highways, Governs Kwame Agbodza, Afenyo-Markin took the floor during a parliamentary sitting on Tuesday to express regret for his remarks. He admitted that his frustration led to an unprofessional reaction and acknowledged the importance of maintaining decorum in parliamentary proceedings.
“Mr. Speaker, let me unreservedly say to the Clerk to the Appointments Committee, Mrs. Gifty Jiagge-Gobah, I am sorry. Let me also say to her husband that my comments, in terms of internal matters, if as a husband he is traumatised by this, I hereby unreservedly apologise. To the children, let me unreservedly say sorry.
“Let me unreservedly say sorry to the extended family, those close and dear to her who are affected by my outpouring of disappointment in her conduct, and to all her colleagues in the parliamentary service, including colleagues who felt I could have managed the matter better. Mr. Speaker, I am sorry,” Afenyo-Markin stated.
His apology has drawn mixed reactions from the political landscape. While some have commended him for showing leadership and humility in admitting his mistake, others believe his initial concerns about the Clerk’s conduct remain valid and require further investigation. Members of the Majority have welcomed his apology as a necessary step towards maintaining the integrity of parliamentary processes, urging all parties to move forward with a renewed commitment to professionalism and cooperation.
The Minority, however, remains firm in its stance against what it perceives as institutional biases within the parliamentary vetting process. Some MPs have insisted that the issues raised by Afenyo-Markin should not be overlooked simply because an apology has been issued. They argue that the Clerk’s alleged impartiality should be examined thoroughly to ensure fairness in future vetting sessions.
In a related development, tensions between the Minority and the Majority have further intensified over the approval of ministerial nominees. The Minority has opposed the approval of Samuel Nartey George as the Minister for Communication, Digital Technology, and Innovations, citing concerns over his suitability for the role. They have questioned his track record and raised issues about his stance on key policy matters within the digital and communication sectors.
The standoff over George’s appointment highlights the growing divide in Parliament, with both sides standing their ground on various appointments and procedural matters. While the Majority argues that George is well-qualified and capable of leading the ministry, the Minority insists that his nomination requires further scrutiny to ensure the right candidate is chosen for the position.
Political analysts have observed that these tensions reflect the broader struggle for control and influence in Ghana’s political landscape. The vetting process, which is meant to assess the competence and credibility of nominees, has increasingly become a battleground for partisan interests. The latest disagreement over Samuel George’s nomination is seen as part of a larger contest between the two main political factions, with each side seeking to assert its dominance ahead of future political engagements.
Despite the ongoing friction, parliamentary observers have emphasized the need for constructive dialogue and consensus-building. They argue that while accountability is crucial, it is equally important for MPs to engage in fair and objective assessments of nominees without allowing personal or political biases to overshadow the process. The call for a more balanced approach has been echoed by civil society groups and governance experts, who stress that the credibility of Ghana’s democratic institutions depends on the ability of lawmakers to rise above partisan conflicts and focus on national development.
Meanwhile, discussions surrounding parliamentary conduct and decorum have gained renewed attention in the wake of Afenyo-Markin’s apology. Many believe that his public expression of regret sets an important precedent for how political leaders should handle conflicts in the legislature. By acknowledging his misstep, he has demonstrated a level of accountability that is often lacking in political discourse. However, some critics remain skeptical, suggesting that his apology may have been driven more by political strategy than genuine remorse.
As Ghana’s Parliament continues to navigate these contentious issues, the focus remains on whether lawmakers can find common ground to ensure the smooth functioning of the country’s governance structures. The coming weeks will likely see further debates on ministerial appointments and parliamentary procedures, with both sides expected to maintain their positions on key issues.
Ultimately, the incident serves as a reminder of the delicate balance required in parliamentary proceedings. While robust debate and scrutiny are essential for democracy, maintaining respect and professionalism in engagements is equally important. The outcome of the ongoing disputes will not only shape the immediate political landscape but also influence how parliamentary affairs are conducted in the future.
