[ad_1]
General news for Friday, December 18, 2020
Source: 3 News
2020-12-18
Minister of Education, Dr. Matthew Opoku Prempeh
Adjunct Professor and Dean of the University of Ghana Law School, Professor Raymond Atuguba, has described as ‘disinformation and disinformation’ the assertions of the Minister of Education, Dr. Mattew Opoku Prempeh, in a recent media interview about the controversial Public Universities Bill (PUB).
The law professor has been highly critical of the infamous bill which has now been suspended after being read a second time in parliament.
In his criticism, he described the bill as “flagrant and manifestly unconstitutional” and called on fellow members of the University Professors Association of Ghana (UTAG) to find ways to stop it before it is passed.
The bill was subsequently suspended and key stakeholders assured that further consultations would take place. In an interview with the media, the Minister of Education appears to have suggested that the bill would be passed before the 7th Parliament rises on January 6, 2021.
This, Professor Atuguba describes as suspicious and desperate.
“It just means that the Minister of Education, who is a Member of Parliament, and is also directly in charge of moving the bill in Parliament, intends to work towards passing the PUB IN THE LAST DAYS OF THIS PARLIAMENT (I think this PUB that we have not seen yet, passing it is as precious as the blood of a crocodile for some, “he wrote.
He said that the statements made by the Minister of Education in that interview with the media are not accurate, so he took the time to answer them in the following way;
“My last set of comments concerns the misinformation and misinformation that accompanied the entire interview.
It is not true, as the Minister of Education intended to portray, that our analyzes of the PUB were based on a draft bill. Our analyzes were based on the version of the bill that was read in Parliament at the second reading; the same version that was delivered to our UTAG Executive by the Minister.
It is not true, as the Minister of Education intended to describe, that the bill provides for 15 Council members and has limited or minority presidential appointments. The bill provides for 16 members of the Council, including 1 president appointed by the president, 5 other members appointed by the president, and 3 members indirectly appointed by the president under article 70 of the 1992 Constitution. This makes a total of 9 persons designated by the president and 7 other designated persons. The quorum for Council meetings is still set at 8 members.
It is not true, as the Minister of Education intended to portray, that the UTAG raised an issue related to the appointment of the Vice Chancellor. The issue raised by the UTAG was related to the appointment of the Chancellor. The PUB intends to confer the power to appoint the rectors of all public universities on the President (Clause 16 (1)), a power that is unconstitutional for violating Article 195 (3) of the 1992 Constitution.
It is not true, as the Minister of Education intended to portray, that the way in which the PUB seeks to constrain the management of a public university has nothing to do with Academic Freedom. Yes, you heard right.
It is not true, as the Minister of Education intended to portray, that the law does not say anything about the policies and powers of admission of public universities. The PUB establishes a centralized admission process, regulated and controlled by the Minister, in accordance with the provisions of Clause 53 (a) of the Bill.
It is not true, as the Minister of Education intended to portray, that a government, once it approves a policy and approves it in the Cabinet (in this case the Tertiary Education Policy), can go ahead to legislate that policy. Surely, a government cannot seek to legislate a policy that is unconstitutional in several respects, as is the case with the PUB.
It is not true, as the Minister of Education intended to portray, that the PUB guarantees Academic Freedom. As I pointed out in my previous email, the PUB provisions on Academic Freedom contain recovery clauses, and it would be better if the bill did not mention it at all, so that Academic Freedom continues to be regulated by general law, which is more progressive.
Finally, it is not true, as the Minister of Education intended to portray, that the LAW OF EDUCATION COLLEGES, 2012 (LAW 847) and the LAW OF TECHNICAL UNIVERSITIES, 2016 (Law 922), approved by previous governments, on the one hand, and the PUB, which is intended to be approved by the current government, on the other hand, are comparable, so anyone who has a problem with the PUB, unless they are hypocritical, must also have problems with the other laws. The two sets of laws are as far apart as day and night:
The laws of colleges of education and technical universities were a boon for colleges of education and polytechnics in Ghana, as they unequivocally elevated them to much higher statuses, with consequent increased resources, among many other advantages. The PUB does the opposite and seeks to stifle and stifle the growth of public universities.
The laws of faculties of education and technical universities were not intended to accumulate powers in the Ministry of Education for the regulation and micromanagement of these universities. The PUB does. While the PUB confers the power to create universities literally in a single man, the Minister, the Law of Technical Universities, for example, provides in Section 2 an application process initiative by the polytechnic itself and specifies the requirements that must be fulfilled before a polytechnic can become a university. Not so with the PUB; There is no application process; there are no basic requirements to meet; And technically, a Minister of Education can file a one-line LI for the village school near his father’s house to become a university, and proceed to name it after his childhood friend.
The laws of faculties of education and technical universities did not name any of the universities after anyone’s name. Those laws preserved the original base names of all universities. The PUB has a preponderance of names of personalities belonging to only one of the 3 or 4 political traditions of this country.
So, folks, UTAG, the fight is not over. As I explained yesterday, Parliament can pass a bill very quickly. We have to continue to be vigilant. “
Send your news to
and features for
. Chat with us through WhatsApp at +233 55 2699 625.
