The unconstitutional reappointment of Mr. Ebenezer Darko (outgoing SRC Chief Justice) is rather disappointing and doesn’t reside in the spirit of the SRC constitution. I think it is strange that for the first time in the history of KTU SRC to reappoint an outgoing Chief Justice. Again, the appointment of the SRC Speaker violates the mode of appointment by the President under Article 5 (2) of the General Assembly Act, 2017 which stipulates that, “Persons appointed or nominated for the office of the Speaker and the Chief Justice are to be part of the outgoing house or an out-gone house for the basis of credibility”. To my surprise, the Speaker nominee has never been an accredited member of the SRC General Assembly before. How can the President-elect be so unconstitutional and disregard the same constitution that gives birth to his presidency?
The latest unconstitutional appointments by the President-Elect (Sarfo Kantanka) and some appointees of the Elorm led administration is clear evidence of a weak and a failed student front. Total lack of transparency, abuse of office for personal gratification, disregard for the SRC constitution, total neglect of due process in the running of the SRC is what we have witnessed lately.
Now, what makes the reappointment of the outgoing Chief Justice unconstitutional?
Article 9B (VII) of the SRC constitution mandates only the Chief Justice to administer the oath of office all executive members and presidential appointees. The big question is if the Chief Justice is reappointed who swears him into office. This alone makes him appoint null and void.
- The Chief Justice can never be appointed and vetted for a position he is currently occupying. It defeats the principles of common law and common sense. Only greed and personal interests will motive such a felonious appointment.
- This unconstitutional appointment also violates Article 4 (2) of the General Assembly Act, 2017 which clearly mandates the Chief Justice to be part of the vetting of presidential appointees. The Chief Justice intentionally nominated the secretary of the judicial committee to replace him due to his felonious reappointment.
- Again, Article 26 of the SRC constitutional also mandates the judicial committee to offer the transition team of the SRC legal advice before handing over. Is this not a clear conflict of interest scenario?
It’s evidently clear that the President-elect and some outgoing officers of the SRC don’t have the student front at heart but are in for their own personal gains with impunity. It’s sad to know that those who are supposed to defend and protect our constitution are rather abusing it for their own personal gains. They simply don’t respect the supremacy of our SRC constitution.
Must we bury our conscience today because of our personal interest tomorrow? Certainly not! Effective student leadership goes beyond this. If Sarfo Kantanka and his team don’t put a stop to this unconstitutional behavior and abuse of power, they will end up as the most useless SRC administration in the history of KTU. We can’t pretend to have students at heart and turn around to abuse their mandate. We have made a lot of mistakes in the past as student leaders but it’s time we learn from our mistakes do the noble thing. Mr. President elect, the students have elected you in good faith to uphold the supremacy of the SRC constitution and as such, listen to our criticisms and advise. We should not that the SRC goes beyond family and friends.
To put on record, the issues are not personal but to ensure that the supremacy of our SRC constitution is always upheld. The president elects and his advisors should take a bold step and apologize to the student body and nominate new people for those positions. I believe there are more qualified people in KTU who can equally occupy these positions.
I want to encourage all general assembly members to resist and combat these wrongs and help protect the supremacy of the SRC constitution. The student front has suffered enough and we have been our own enemies for long.
Any attempt to continue these unconstitutional appointments will only attract legal action against the Council.