A heated exchange during the vetting of a ministerial nominee has reignited debates over the leadership of Parliament’s Appointments Committee, with IMANI Ghana’s Founding President Franklin Cudjoe leading calls for the reinstatement of Kweku George Ricketts-Hagan as chairman.
The controversy stems from a clash between Minority Leader Alexander Kwamina Afenyo-Markin and current committee chair Bernard Ahiafor, who overruled a request for the nominee to perform a traditional dance during the vetting process.
The drama unfolded on February 26, 2025, during the vetting of Justice Srem-Sai, the Deputy Attorney General and Minister of Justice-designate. Afenyo-Markin, the Ranking Member on the committee, asked the nominee to demonstrate borborbor, a traditional Ewe dance, as part of the session. However, Chairman Ahiafor swiftly overruled the request, sparking a sharp rebuke from the Minority Leader.
Afenyo-Markin argued that showcasing cultural elements had been a longstanding tradition in previous vetting sessions, citing examples of nominees speaking their native dialects and engaging in similar demonstrations. “Chairman, if you decide to be whimsical and capricious, it will not advance the work of this committee,” Afenyo-Markin asserted. “Apart from the constitutional issues, it is also about our culture. We have had nominees speaking their dialects, and I do not think that if you start with ‘overruled, overruled,’ it helps.”
Ahiafor, visibly irked by the Minority Leader’s choice of words, demanded that Afenyo-Markin withdraw his description of the ruling as “whimsical and capricious.” When Afenyo-Markin refused, Ahiafor exercised his authority as chairman, cutting short the Minority Leader’s questioning of the nominee. “Well, to demonstrate to you that I am the chairman of this particular vetting committee, that may be your last question,” Ahiafor declared.
The exchange has since sparked widespread debate, with Franklin Cudjoe weighing in on the matter. In a Facebook post, Cudjoe expressed disappointment with the current leadership of the Appointments Committee, praising Afenyo-Markin for making the vetting sessions insightful and lively. He criticized Ahiafor’s approach as “rigid, unprepared, and uninspiring,” calling for the return of Ricketts-Hagan, who previously chaired the committee.
“Be honest, guys. But for Afenyo-Markin, this whole vetting would have been boring, and we never would have known so much about the nominees,” Cudjoe wrote. “You don’t spoil it by bringing back the most rigid, unprepared, and severely uninspiring chairman. Sad. Bring back Ricketts-Hagan.”
Cudjoe’s comments reflect broader concerns about the tone and effectiveness of the vetting process under Ahiafor’s leadership. Critics argue that the committee has become less engaging and more bureaucratic, stifling the lively exchanges that once characterized these sessions. Supporters of Ahiafor, however, maintain that his approach ensures discipline and adherence to procedural norms.
The clash over the dance request highlights deeper tensions within the committee, with some lawmakers accusing Ahiafor of stifling cultural expression and others defending his commitment to maintaining order. As the debate continues, the call for Ricketts-Hagan’s return underscores a growing desire for a more balanced and dynamic approach to the vetting process—one that respects tradition while fostering transparency and accountability.
For now, the incident serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between parliamentary decorum and the need for engaging, informative vetting sessions. Whether the committee heeds calls for change remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the drama in Parliament is far from over.