Business News of Thursday, 19 August 2021
Source: www.ghanaweb.live
2021-08-19Parliamentary approval not required for international transactions – GNPC
The Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC)
• The GNPC has responded to a 2020 audit report by the Auditor General's Department
• The Corporation says it does not require parliamentary approval to undertake international transactions
• The GNPC also described the finding from the audit report as inaccurate, misleading and one that carried no legal basis
The Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC), has indicated that it does not require
Read full article.parliamentary approval to undertake international transactions.
This comes after the Auditor General's Department in its 2020 report said the GNPC entered into five significant international business contracts without Parliamentary approval, contrary to the provisions of Article 181 of the 1992 Constitution.
But in a rejoinder issued to the audit report, GNPC described the findings as inaccurate, misleading and one that carried no legal basis.
“The requirement to seek parliamentary approval for the five transactions referred to in the report does not apply to GNPC and we request that the Auditor General corrects his findings and conclusions as soon as possible,” portions of the rejoinder read.
It further stated that the GNPC Act (PNDCL 64) establishes the GNPC as a distinct legal entity and, as such, it is not legally considered to be part of Government.
“Article 181 (5) of the 1992 Constitution pertaining to Parliamentary approvals for international business transactions strictly relates to “Government” business and not generally to statutory corporations set up for commercial purposes,” it added.
The Corporation also called on the Auditor General and his staff to fully apprise themselves accurately with the legal framework governing GNPC’s affairs.
“We urge the Auditor General and his staff to cultivate extreme diligence in their duties to avoid embarrassing themselves and the state entities they audit.”
Read the full rejoinder below: