According to Inusah Fuseini, a former Member of Parliament for Tamale Central, there is no such thing as ex-gratia in Ghana’s constitution.
According to him, what the general public refers to as ex-gratia are the retirement benefits that Members of Parliament and other Article 71 officeholders are entitled to after fulfilling their term of office.
He stated on JoyNews’ PM Express that efforts to abolish the retirement benefits of Article 71 officeholders are inappropriate since MPs and other Article 71 officeholders are contract workers who must get their retirement benefits at the end of their tenure.
“There’s no ex-gratia, there’s nothing like ex-gratia. Ex-gratia is a lexicon taken from the ordinary people and put on the payments to Members of Parliament. There’s no ex-gratia in the constitution. The constitution says they should pay you retirement benefits.
He emphasized that the retirement benefit should not be confused with the pension program to which Members of Parliament contribute.
He noted that, while the Pension system is based on intergenerational equity, the retirement benefit is based on one’s wage.
He claims that the practice is widespread over the world.
“No because you’re a contract worker. You’re working for four years and at the end of the four years you’re gone. So your retirement benefits will be calculated on the basis of your salary.
Read Also: NSS is not owing 3 months allowance – Deputy Executive Director
“This is not the case, the principle is quite different. With the greatest respect, it’s all over the world. In fact in Britain it’s called gratuity. Even the court in Apasera called it gratuity.
“Gratuity means you’re working, you’re being paid salary and when your contract ends they pay you a percentage of your salary as gratuity,” he explained.
He did, however, agree that the gratuity exclusively helps the government’s elite class of employees.
“I agree there some kind of conspiracy and that is what is evoking the anger of the people that you can’t bring together a class of people and treat them differently. So when his Excellency John Mahama was in power, I remember this matter came out very seriously, very prominently, and he thought that committee [Presidential Emoluments Committee] should be a standing committee.
“And it should not be at the instance of a sitting President. And any time there’s a new parliament, you don’t need to change the members unless you replace some who are dead or who cannot perform then they take decisions,” he said.
SOURCE: myjoyonline
