POLITICS

Ayariga to apologize again to Parliament

Mahama Ayariga

The Member of Parliament for Bawku Central, Mahama Ayariga, has reportedly written an apology letter to the Speaker of Parliament, Prof. Michael Oquaye.

The apology letter comes a day after disagreements over the Joe Ghartey committee report that found the MP to be in contempt of Parliament.

Mr. Ayariga submitted the apology letter through the Speaker’s Deputy.

In his supposed apology statement, he is also expected to apologize to Energy Minister, Boakye, Agyarko, for his comments which sought to link him to his allegation of bribery in Parliament. He’s also to apologize to the Speaker, and the entire leadership of Parliament.

The Speaker has subsequently approved Mahama Ayariga’s apology statement.

The Bawku MP is thus expected to officially apologize on the floor of parliament, when the House resumes sitting today, and the apology statement is read.

In the statement, Mr. Ayariga will also apologize to the First Deputy Speaker, Joe Osei-Owusu, and the Minority Chief Whip, Mutanka Mubarak for the bribery claims he made against them.

The Bawku Central MP, who made the bribery claims against Members of the Appointments Committee and Minister of Energy Boakye Agyarko, was found guilty of contempt of Parliament, following investigations by the committee which concluded that “Mr. Mahama Ayariga is in Contempt of Parliament on the strength of Article 122 of the 1992 Constitution, Section 32 of the Parliament Act, 1965 (Act 300) and Orders 28 and 30 (2) of the Standing Orders of Parliament.”

The committee, after rubbishing Mr. Ayariga’s bribery allegation on Thursday, asked him to render an unqualified apology to purge himself of contempt.

ALSO READ:  NPP will lose 2020 elections – Kennedy Agyapong

But Mr. Ayariga, who appeared unhappy with the work of the committee, reluctantly rendered the apology, saying : “Mr. Speaker, if you say I should apologize, I have apologized.”

Before this apology, he said the committee’s recommendations were problematic, especially when it failed to conduct due diligence by cross examining the “other sides” to arrive at a fair conclusion.

He also said the committee did not have the mandate to declare him in contempt of the court.

Story by citifmonline.com

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Commentluv

To Top