‘President didn’t fix his pay’: Essuman fires back
A fresh dispute has emerged over the salaries and benefits of presidential staff after former presidential legal adviser Kow Essuman accused the government of presenting a misleading account of how the current remuneration package was approved.
The controversy follows comments by Minister of State for Government Communications, Felix Kwakye Ofosu, regarding the salary and emolument framework currently applicable to personnel at the Presidency.
Responding in a social media post on Monday, Mr Essuman argued that public discussions on the issue must be guided by the constitutional process governing the determination of salaries for holders of certain public offices.
According to him, the framework was not created by former President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, as some public commentary appears to suggest. Rather, he said, the Constitution assigns responsibility for determining such remuneration to Parliament, acting on recommendations submitted through the appropriate constitutional mechanisms.
Mr Essuman stressed that neither a sitting President nor members of the executive branch possess the authority to independently set salaries and allowances for themselves or their staff.
He maintained that suggestions to the contrary risk creating a false impression about how compensation for public office holders is established under Ghana’s constitutional order.
The former legal adviser further pointed to the timing of Parliament’s approval of the current salary structure, noting that the package received parliamentary endorsement on January 6, 2025, the final day of the Akufo-Addo administration.
His intervention adds a new dimension to ongoing discussions about public sector remuneration and executive expenditure, issues that have increasingly attracted political attention in recent months.
While the government has defended its position, Mr Essuman insists that any debate on presidential salaries should accurately reflect the constitutional roles of Parliament and the executive, arguing that the process is designed specifically to prevent office holders from determining their own compensation.
The exchange is expected to fuel further political debate over public spending, accountability and the interpretation of constitutional provisions relating to Article 71 office holders.
Source: myjoyonline.com
About The Author
