Ghana-US Joint Military Deal - Newsfile on JoyNews (24-3-18)

[Music] [Applause] [Music] science what is known so status of forces agreement with the United States to deal with specific matters that was up what happened in 2015 you said risk you said terrorism by approving this you are opening the floodgates to open this country to measure risk of terrorism and its potential attack and principle therefore restrictions will be exhibited president and the President of the Republic with a grand affair NDT minorities we are unable to continue with this process thank you on majority decision support American government through a cowardly as what we do it because give us an opportunity to improve it the United States of America why they stood up against puppies because of abuses of human rights the open the floodgates to Ghana for them to come and abuses the NBC minority mr. speaker I should have said realities this one we will be able to be honest [Applause] [Applause] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] [Music] [Music] suspended what kind of minutes he'll meet the leaders [Music] [Applause] I think twenty million dollars being invested in the Ghanaian armed forces in one year is a pretty significant return twenty million dollars for unrestricted access to the country it's not unrestricted access it's only access to the basis that Ghana makes available to the United States for the exercises so you get to choose the debate those bases don't you the government of Ghana gets to choose those basics and just as if you were inviting me into your home and you said that's your bedroom once you want somebody to knock before you came in well that's my point it's it's as simple as that when we have people here we want to ensure that we're cooperating that we're working well together but there's also a right to privacy but then you can bring everything into this country take everything out of this country without anybody checking no we can't what we bring in to the country is mostly left here except for basic personal equipment which people travel with all the time and what we take out of the country the Ghanaian government will know what was brought in what will is going out its manifested it kind of comes in as diplomatic cargo there's no there's no secret about it and if there's any secrecy involved it's because the material is something that the Ghanaian government believes should be restricted for for the public good so that our enemies will not know what the capabilities are my final question said if you were gonna and we've seen the document if you were gonna and would you think that this is a fair deal I have always thought it's a fair deal and I think that when people see how it's being executed they she will think it's a fair deal in fact I really sincerely believe that a payment of twenty million dollars an investment in Ghana's police and armed forces is well worth public scrutiny on the one hand and when people see the actual execution they'll say that was a good investment you're welcome back and you had mine rotameter in Parliament Haroon a resuit and you had the speaker also calling for order as there was near chaos in that house the workhouse was staked by the minority and the majority of course had BSA and had be away in addition to that you also had the us you know ambassador to Ghana with Jackson also explaining the circumstances and trying to explain to understanding what the taste that is not in the contract or the agreement that is being suggests that are there in the public that is in the agreement now let me introduce my guest to you right away and I do not have a take this morning because our table is full so my guest this morning our regular panelists and editor-in-chief of the new crusade in guide newspaper Abdul Malik kuku back home thank you very much for joining us he he's got all the documents past and present as far as this matter is concerned and very shortly he would you know be laying them out and tell you his understanding of them also in the studio is lawyer ace and an uncommon that's it okay I gotta be careful we are privileged to have the defense minister himself in the studio in the passing of Dominick me to Kabul thank you very much for joining us we thank you that you made time thank also former deputy interior minister James a galge good morning welcome to the studio okay so they are both MPs as and they were all in Parliament's and having part of all the arguments that have gone on well before I start because Dominic little is right here also let me state this if you go to the Ghana web page there's a story that was put up this morning early morning I was about finishing up my preparation normally what I do is I do all my preparation and early in the morning I'll continue and perhaps offering will go to Ghana web and almost various different web sites to check what is new that I may not know before I come to the studio but I delayed a bit in doing that and if former attorney general and a very senior at the bar who I respect a lot and who mentors me silently in how to show a lot of respect to Ghana and not to win your argument by shouting brought to my attention story that you know took a dig at the defense minister as someone who was unfit for the jury for his job and so I call the attention of the Ghana web because they attributed it to me and I never uttered any such statements thankfully Ghana web also has a true gentleman in an editor who took it down immediately and apologized to me the story was originated by my news gamma my news Ghana I think yes I drew the attention of the audit editor also to it and I suspect by now he had done the honorable thing point is in the heat of his press conference he holding press conferences and speaking about the matters a lot teacher justice Schramm's I had comments to make and wrote profusely about it and portions of it were being circulated and what I sometimes do is that I put a post to elicit some views to Syst my show I visit various peasants website and for our walls to be guided serious opinion holders on social media so I also copied and put on my page and indicated clearly that I had copied from that fessing hoping that I could read what the comments will be to guide me so I have not offered any such statement thank you very much for taking the story down and we can move on from there I've told the Honorable you know Minister that if I have views about how he does his things and I disagree I'll share them with him privately and that's that's true I have views about how his posture too you know speaking about mattes and I've told him I'll tell him privately unless he doesn't then I may speak publicly about them alright so let's get to the matters that we have to deal with this morning and they are fest about the agreements between the United States of America and Ghana it's a military you know cooperation agreements that has various things about it that has engendered so much public debate and uproar and the conclusion by those who are against it is that Ghana is simply selling its sovereignty to the United States of America true or false but this morning more particularly we will we will scrutinize that documents and as the question what is in it what is in it for Ghana I'd like to start with the minister himself you have had the opportunity of listening to what Ganon's feel about disagreements you have been compelled to hold a press conference and to stick what are the facts despite that there is still significant significant groundswell of public opinion against it irrespective of the fact that the representatives of the people in India majority in the NPP have approved same and ratified Ghana connects a program on joy joy FM yesterday did you know a survey about 8,000 people contributed and out of that number over eighty percent were clearly against it now convinced this eighty percent no matter how small the number is why disagreement is okay and Ghana should buy into it as you have done something thank you very much in and we greet the people of Ghana and say clearly that the people of Ghana had the right to hold opinions for or against this agreement and rightly so because when the president appointed me as minister and this document came to my table the Americans had negotiated with the Ghana Armed Forces a number of activities will be doing going forward let me state that we've always had a security agreement with the Americans as a country in fact as a country every president has always had its critic remained either with America or another country from our first president oh come on come on till the current president the nod on Corcovado has always had secretive documents and security agreements with other countries what we have never done is to share this security agreements publicly this is the first time that a government has taken the deliberate decision to share this publicly noting that because it's the first time we we had the unfortunate incident of politicizing that agreement and has led where we are today the one will you share agreement that are supposed to be confidential secret publicly what will you do that is he the Supreme Court of the Republic of Ghana takes the view that every agreement must go to Parliament how does it go to Parliament gosu Parliament from cabinet with a cabinet memo and with a memo from the Minister once it reaches the rim of Parliament and that's as Ally what we did give them a copy it is out of the jurisdiction of that Minister or the executive it is Parliament that squarely the food is on Parliament could have chosen to take the committee in walk all come to of the wall and secretly look at it or decide that we believe that the first dish to look at it publicly but in this particular case even before Parliament took the decision some people leaked it to the media from Parliament and that's what I'm saying that created all these problems but let me go to the whole agreement itself our American friends brought an agreement with a preamble that's sought to ask the people of Ghana that the one Ted has to determine the status of their forces in Ghana will be visiting Ghana because they had arranged a series of activities with our armed forces and so when the assuages come here whatever number what a hundred fifty two hundred to do this work what media statues in Ghana and secondly they want to have access to and be able to use some facilities that are ours in Ghana and if they do not want to be able to use these activities within civilian areas but we delete military installations remember that these facilities are ours and their action is to allow them to use these facilities once they are here to do the work that they have agreed with the Ghana Armed Forces this VA they have agreed to do four exercises with a gunner Armed Forces and when they come the first one is about two hundred soldiers the second one I think about 150 soldiers when they come to Ghana what is the status of the average Americans with the who's here and what's of facilities are going to make available for them to be able to use . that's what this whole agreement is about so they come to swear as a question of status arise because when they come they're soldiers yes the statutes are right because there are certain benefits and setting privileges that they want from us and in the agreement they ask for certain facilities and certain benefits and certain privileges and it's up to us to make a choice whatever we want these facilities want these benefits to them or not so when I met the agreement and they had made copious references to earlier agreements that we have signed with them which are still enforced in 1999 98 we signed an agreement with them which is still in force we signed an agreement according to them in 2001 which is still in force in 2000 which is still in force in 2015 which is still in force and in fact the base document that they use in preparing this agreement is the agreement that ganas signed with them in 2015 then Hannah today she signed that agreement but something unfortunately Ghana didn't have the copy of our agreement the missile defense did not have the agreement the um forces do not have the agreement the Minister of Foreign Affairs did not have the annotator agreement it was the Americans who actually gave us that agreement so once we signed this agreement with the Americas and they kept a copy Ghana's simply did not keep a new copy neither was gonna aware because it was not in my honey no one knows it was not in the hand over news of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and I'm forces didn't have it so clearly we didn't know that we had signed this agreement and until the Americas made reference to read and I said come on I don't have any idea I wrote to the Foreign Minister I spoke to her she's sexual - she didn't have it it was when they I'm I'm forces where we're meeting with Americans over how to structure this thing two months of a magical in Stuttgart Germany then the Americans give them a copy of the agreement the honey that argument that's how messed up myself as a country as a faith thing then never before that you say that the 1998 the 2001 the 2000 2001 and that 2015 you know agreements are in force yes if they enforce what we need another wall so the Americans I see in that and and in it tells you in the last paragraph that once we sign this agreement it should persist all an agreement that we have with them so they are both up every agreement that we have with them into one document in too impulsive dated it into one document and I saying that was a sign when the agreement fest came the reason why it was in my ministry for a year and a half it's very simple when the agreement came I looked at it as any other guy name and had one sense that why do we want to give you immunity why are you saying that if somebody way to die we we have no no we cannot see you why are you saying that which I like to come when we come as so yes maybe of course we just move in large group to put them in aeroplanes they come they shouldn't come with transpose because my ministry has no control Arad why you say no which allow you to carry a gun when you give others look you you have no been the respect of saying that we should consult Minister of Interior I had concerns why is it that that Daniel Sousa it for example is going to America in large groups to do an exercise you are also given the same conditions to them even though technically I know that our defense advices what it is and their staff are given the same diplomatic status in America but then when we also win large groups to America for example fun exercise I expected that we should also have the ability to go not would up high decals are possible with adocus so have concerns something what I did and I told them was that I was not I'm not in the position to sign this agreement unless a pass through the normal channels of scrutiny there are levels that I want this Agreement to pass through and if this agreement is able to go through all these levels they now know that the people are gonna truly want this agreement if they agree I will study pudding if they don't agree I'm sorry I'm not sure that it was process of it and that's why I said a state in the Minister for close to two years over one and a half years since I came I met it something the first thing I did was to study engage in them so I wrote them that they should be very clear with me whether it was a business or it was not a beast and the American ambassador truth clearly to my office to say look we don't intend to have abyss we haven't actually beast and it will not be in peace it is a facility at the gunner F was base which we have used several times that we are axel in 2015 honorable a less Sabathia truly letter granted Americans the opportunity to stay in Ghana for a period of five weeks to fight Boko Haram in Nigeria so we Ghana was used as the base to fight Boko Haram in Nigeria and it was the ducting Minister then who ruled a letter and give them that we staged it the broader aircrafts they used that facility for that five weeks to the local fight Boko Haram in Nigeria so the Americas pointed out to me that it is the facility that sometimes the use and they have been using will anytime kangana that they are saying that instead of allowing other countries to have access to that facility we alone want to take that facility and be using for our web with you that's basically what I agree facilities are talking about would there not have been a reason you have sought for clarity and you have been giving so in writing would that not be a reason I'm sure that that would have incorporated into the terms of the agreement so that you are clear that this is not a beast then the argument will not arise how come to that okay that because you have that explanation the others who saw it and equated it to abase don't have that vanishing I'll come to that okay so against you I wrote to the Americans to let them understand that I needed to pass this particular agreement through all the channels they wrote back to see they are amenable to that and that they are men able to every negotiation that we could go through something so I then told them that they should get a team from America and we got a team in Ghana so I wrote to all the ministry's consent foreign FS national security interior the AG the Armed Forces every minute every Minister concept and they provided me with a technical and a person to come and form our team - at 12 of them I have the dempsey but I will not mention them is no good the names and numbers overtook the rule so we had our team and the Americans had the achieve and then when they wished each in one by one close by Klaus Klaus back close close by Klaus the original agreement was ways than this some some process we took them out some who brought them in and so we negotiated and to what where we we are because remember that this template is a standard template America is all over the world and they the Americans have this particular one what were actually said it was not different from the previous ones no I'm coming I'm saying to you that is a template I will use across the world if you check this in a gawah is this as if if you read the synagogue where you think you are reading a gonna one if you read the one that is to me assigned recently and what the administer what American was announcing the public to the world you think I written the gonna one if you read the Spanish one and maybe I would download it for you you tell you everything the kind of one if you read almost everyone that this sign which me already that gonna one because it is a template that is sang with everybody the only country that managed to force them to negotiate was gonna and the man the ambassador was surprised why do you know what if all of them are identical then I doubt what work you would have done no I wouldn't ago she I'll come to that for example the one that scientists antonetti it said that they could who guns if given if given by their orders that meant that want Americans other than to hold gun in Ghana hooligan and still in force we are those who sign it in 1988 the NDC government then Viterbo was the foreign minister he signed it in 1898 but when we change in this current agreement is to say that they must consult the appropriate agency and which here is a missile of interior so the camera just come to Ghana and start issuing orders a hooligan until they get that license from the Minister of Interior I don't know what I you get what I'm trying that's the difference between the 1988 one and their hands one we managed to insect but I'll come to each clause by clause that were talking about so something we did the cleanup that we thought we could do then we don't took it to the Armed Forces cancel the emphasis countries made up all the service chiefs the seediest formally tight general the vice president the Minister of Interior mr. Foreign Affairs Minister of Defense we looked at it and we approved of it after we did whatever we wanted to do that from the enforces cancel it then went to cabinet cabinet also looked at it it stayed in cabinet for over three months they did we did whatever wanted to do the AG but he'll opinion everybody would do whatever wanted to do and then finally we took it to Parliament of course alman use trade is to consider it and approve it it my ministry stays very long state in the armed forces cancel for some time state at the cabinet for a long time but cost almond decided that they would approve it within three days and they did what I'm saying is that at every step I ensure that it was no more just a decision of the Minister for defence but that it was the combination of the voices of the people of Ghana that would approve or disapprove of this document okay and for me one of the reasons we we believe strongly that issued an open debate was to ensure that parliament members of parliament from all sides both at a community level and at the the overall Parliament House itself would be able to factor the abuse into this so they needed to reject it or approve of it in fact even at the committee level you can ask them they made some changes to pass some of the portions a lot Emma had gone out when I came back the army journalist convinced them that the way it was it was much better and rescinded a decision at a community level that we will get to that and I'd like you to pause here briefly before we get into what happened in Parliament and the processes leading up to the ratification yesterday but just something I think that the gunner has said it over and over again the Ghana Armed Forces and then this the ministry especially this ministry never negotiated agreement on the basis that we would get to table on dollars okay we will deal with that you deal with that and if you hear how the u.s. if you hear how he put it people are not wrong to say that that is what it is now James well what are the points of disagreements by the minority I want that I want you to help our viewers and listeners again by restating these points in a manner that all of us can appreciate which clauses do you have problems with or it is all of them is it for example the articles three articles to four or five there about where they are going to have access for example gamma hereby provides unimpeded access to and use of agreed facilities and areas to United States forces United States force United States from practice and others ADIZ share with us yes thank you very much the views of the minority very simple and straightforward and those views first of all to debunk the argument that has been made all along that Ghana has previously had they say if you like agreement with the United States government and adduced agreements remain in force something if you look at the agreement that was dealt with by Parliament yesterday it's obvious that it's not the same agreement that we have we were called upon to consolidate by the title yes even if we look at a article true it's very clear article 2 talks about the purpose and scope right and in article 2 1 you see it's very clear let me read for the benefit of our viewers this Agreement sets forth a framework for enhanced my emphasis enhanced partnership and security cooperation between the parties with the aims of strengthening their defence relationships farah and addressing shared security challenges in the region and it goes on and on and on will enhance and enhance will enhance not be what he meant when he said a consolidation of these previous you know documents whichever way you look at it from the wedding of article 2 there are fundamental differences between this agreement the 1998 agreement and the 2015 agreement which is attributed to honourable annotate a okay usually these ones were not binding can you establish that too because you have shown that this is an a point demonstrating clearly that they are not the same as he claimed yes and I have issues that I haven't said several points at least cameras let me take you to nurse Article five if you could the whole of article 5 max a fundamental difference and that is the point of departure article 5 1 gives the United States Armed Forces and impeded access to and use of agreed facilities and areas to United States forces contractors etc then you come down to and it further states and for that United States forces are hereby authorized to control entry through agreed facilities and areas that have been provided for exclusive my emphasis exclusive use by the United States forces and to coordinate entry with the authorities of Ghana if you look at these provisions you are giving them unimpeded access you are giving them a specific control and impeded access to what to agreed facilities so the facilities must be agreed yes so where's the problem yes you would agree but the moment you agree they in for would now have exclusive exclusive control and use but that is that is the point ghanians are worried about Lama or if you are a landlord and you led to me your facility your house must you have access to that facility not when you are talking about the Armed Forces of another country okay because if if you look at our Constitution you see Armed Forces are supposed to be reached and maintained by the government of the the country no any other grouping is allowed to reason and for so if you allow the Armed Forces of another country to have elusive control and access to facilities with deemed necessary just hold on briefly for me I understand that your microphone is beginning to misbehave so hold on briefly I return to you to converse your point they are coming the technicians are coming to tweak it so that we can hear you and hear you clearly now whilst we are waiting for James I got the former deputy interior minister to recanvass or to continue with his points he shown to us first of all that the documents as claimed are not the same he is giving us one point but this is an enhanced one unlike the previous so that's a point that shows that it is not the same he will show us one or two more points to show that they are not the same and then you proceed to show us demonstrate to us when he says the minister is wrong when he claims that they they are binding on us the previous documents are binding on us now let me come to ace ace has read and has annotated its copy in front of him so is now look at our audience and presume them to be persons that have a difficulty appreciating these terminologies and assist them where are the problem areas the problem areas are the minority mentioning what are they and why are there problems or they are not James's rights to an expense that the agreements are not exactly the same exactly the same in a formal content both the the you can if they're constant if you consolidate in various documents you put them to some of the comfort zone that clauses might conflict and so you take them out there's chopping and changing around so he's right the names each document is essentially one page but at the heart of the names each document as this whole cooperation agreement which is replicated in the 2018 right so on that basis there some of course is right on the issue that this one doesn't specifically see that there will be agreed facilities that you might have that you have exclusive use of once we agree you have been unimpeded access but you you're right that the unimpeded access is limited to agreed facilities so that if we agree that you would have access to the zoom then we will not thereafter seek to impede your access to the zone I just want wanting to be made and and he's also writes to another extent the this agreement has a clear termination clause with the years notice the 2018 agreement is not too much if I saw something if it's a tenancy I'll see one month or three months of course if it's military with our countrymen and everything I'm not sure or sure whether the one year was long in our questions that we probably should get from the answers which government means I why they thought one year and not nobody treats but that is your many years of practice is this not unprecedented one year's notice or is all these things I think that if I have my practice I haven't built with military contracts I've dealt with licenses and leases and possessions etc etc it depends on the bargaining power of the parties that will come to a point my major disappointments with this is the speed tier Parliament the minister says it stands for months on his desk before the three years it went to cabinet for four months at the time he finished reading he sent it to Parliament Y will be Russian because the people of Ghana encountering this for the first time you should expect that we will balk at it they translate the ministry the Minister on the Ministry and and the councils that way involving the teams that have gone through their negotiations would have done a good job well known about after we read it there was a general everybody will admit that questions started being asked Mac my first reaction was India president call us a certain name what does he want from us does my first reaction then i sat down and said take take it easy go into this thing just go back a little bit as far back as 1962 and and I'll kill Elif I could go back to 962 the critical issues here has a bit to do with the diplomatic immunity we give to them right so that if they commit offences here we can try them that's a try cetera in 1962 couple of years after we became a republic we passed the visiting Forces Act which means that we've always had this issue with foreign forces coming to Ghana it happens routinely some come for a couple of days some come for a few months some could be yes and that's why America only oh no bosses okay and as a matter of fact that my I first came across this with certain poses act in my in that issue they Argentina that's when I saw the address off this is not taught to us in law school I came across the irony they react and we considered it very carefully to see what that I stopped Ghana from what happened now the critical thing about that is we decided in 1962 and it is so low somebody said but I said 1962 act and the guy who said he's a doctor I said unlike your medicines yes I like your medicines lost my spot until you peel them super request Nutella coffee who has another copy here okay and the critical things in that act one that if they commit offenses in Ghana we are dividing which offenses we can try and which offenses they try themselves by what they call the safe spots and so if the Frances have to do with there are people like that and their property they will try them you know defensively in Ghana but one critical one which was with and always not my mind was that any an act done or anything emitted by the discharge of an official duty so that if the visitin soldier is Qantas is conducting an official duty and commit an offence anything as a an act or anything emitted then they get to try any other offense is tried on our Criminal Code by the gonna cause so maybe if he steals that one we can say that it wasn't a chat the set of official duty but submit if he's driving his car any trans recklessly and hits my car and somebody dies his service quote which I am but they were put in a cross said no no no if what he does affects a civilian then our defense minister econd the head of the dissident forces was sit down to discuss whether they try him or our courts try him and have him put this law in place in 1962 requirement group then we put in a clause which says that but although we are so to divide ad criminal jurisdiction in case there's an offense in Ghana we can enter into an agreement to alter this says the section shall have effect subject to an agreement between the Republic in respect of the visas in force and the sending state with the force be long so that actually the basis of these agreements that we will enter into whether we mention them or not is actually section 2 4 which gives us the power to alter this division of which I I find a bit unacceptable to alter this is original jurisdiction by an agreement the next one that caught my attention then it and still catches my attention has to do with bearing arms and engage in military training now under law that would be offenses to bear arms in Ghana unless you are licensed or and if you engage in a military training that the whole thing about the South African forces who were deported it was good regimes will be engaging in an illegal military training we specifically authorized them to do it by saying that they are criminal law on bearing arms and holding military services military training will not apply to visiting forces so ladies and gentlemen newsflash and I don't like me when I when I when I present the Lord this way but we but this is I said the provisions of the criminal offenses act 1960 are 29 relating to military training and exercises and the kind of offensive weapons shall not apply to a member of a visiting force acting in the course of official duty so what we have put in this agreement is needless repetitively nonsense some of it's because they've added others some of it is based on law but clearly under the scenario and I suspect several know that you are not aware of our government have entered into and built on these so there's that history so I came to look at the 98 agreement and you're right is not the same it's one page hmm but the Hat of it is still the heart that is beating today they added to it things that we ought to be concerned about okay so let's do this for me quick little article 15 what is your interpretation of article 15 as compared lives yes as compared to this lawyer affair as to now it says that other than contractual claims the parties waive any and all claims against each other for damage to or loss or destruction of property owned by the party or death or injury to any military personnel and civilian employees of either party arising out of the performance of their official duties in Ghana okay what is the meaning of this in the face of what you just read to us from our own law not the agreement it follows from something else this is doesn't hang on his own you see under the Vienna Convention military people are not entitled to diplomatic immunity okay and very early in the Argentine case they tried to set up the the argument that the vessel had diplomatic immunity it immediately got shot down okay oh so if you decide to extend the Vienna Convention and we also have diplomatic immunity immunities act based on the Vienna Convention to anybody had that done a straight-out diplomat as as is defined you need some laws to be complied with in Ghana in the past it was the 40 minutes that we need a look but a couple of recent decisions the court upheld at the Forum mister can sit in his office and grin diplomatic immunity they ought to be a parliamentary process so a lot of the diplomatic immunities we have granted if we got got into it will not have the force of law okay so to the extent that's all these agreements didn't go to Parliament the diplomatic immunities we've reported to gun to military people before this before now we're all invalid it does not a program when our government will comply with our laws or we pretend although exist so let's get this plate I read from diplomatic immunity so it has si deployed in Ghana and he rents my house that's a contract chuckling I can sue him if he doesn't be but if we have we have an accident I'm Monica I'm officer Scott we can't basically what you do is that in our courts you pursue back-channel please here and James you guys also the same to you this Weaver finally the embassy proposes that both governments waive any and all claims other than contract in the same language against each other for loss damage loss destruction of property of the department of defense of property of the minute organic arising out of related to official duties injury suffered by militia personal etc etc okay and what is just read is the 1990 1998 agreement so people have been right but these are incidents of the diplomatic status yeah so that is where I made a point that kind of giving us more time because then we will say that if that government of Ghana is going to run these waivers and immunities to these soldiers please give us an intermediate act by with the government of Ghana says that if I'm driving my car and I run into anime America or maybe Russian or Canadian the vehicle here on the basis of this Agreement I can proceed against government or Ghana okay because what happens in a normal diplomatic world is that you don't go to court they do back home channel I mean so far in our face yes I'm returning to Agra now but if I can do this quickly for me let's go 18 still around same issues that people are really enraged about settlement of disputes any disputes regarding the application implementation or interpretation of this agreement or its implementing arrangements shall be resolved at the lowest level possible end as necessary elevator to the executive agent for consideration and resolution those disputes that cannot be resolved by the executive agents shall be referred to the parties for consultation and resolution as appropriate and shall not be referred to any national or international courts tribunal or similar body unless otherwise agreed this is security of information which is the document which position is that security of information radical what yeah I'm cool that's another six or so right across six it doesn't see what that is close to us it says that no no I just want a the truth will go together it is in it is the intent of the parties no no any inning where is it aha okay that's okay thus the article nine or eight interpretation and amendments and revision revision of information so at college one any disagreements regarding the interpretation or application of this Agreement any implementing arrangements or transactions executed here under shall be resolved through consultation and negotiation as necessary between the parties and shall not be referred to any national or international tribunal or third party for settlement okay so okay so they are the same but there's a bit of an event unless otherwise mutually let is tell us when the implications of this for Ghana that is why because then convince people digested this and maybe explanations clothing given or maybe changes could have been made to this and then language of this language is American to the extent that even the spelling of material is material with an ease of an a at the end we did some changes but we did not imprint ourselves on this and so when somebody reads something we said disputes will be resolved and the lowest level possible it sounds snobbish but if you sit down and look at the if you can answer yes plinth you can end up wait a second there's this escalating dispute resolution process which are you start with negotiation you might do mediation before you hit arbitration and once you hit arbitration you actually exclude the cause that's right you could you could do those by your contract that caused me not be bound by it that all they all they all the experience I'm the one doesn't have to go through so if we are had more time then maybe don't like reversed into gun means that because they found this acts unacceptable they turn in something that well if we get there we can also agree that we'll go to a court of their party yeah this sounds nice but an agreement one to agree is invalid as in a contract unless I support my Constitution so simply putting unless otherwise I literally agreed there doesn't help but if which are the areas that we disagree so it looks nice but we are we all have been opportunity elements for all of us to have the time okay you read digest ingest and contribute to this maybe all of us is likely can't ask banged up help you you want a ratcheting in 20 days thank you is and and and a says we should leave this discussion to military expects sorry sorry we don't agree with you you see then this what happens in this and and whose joy when they've had an interview they sit down and write your way the way they understood it like what is that to be aware of content is content 15 I did be same our son away was pinning me to a yes or no my point was that one of the things that the media has filled us on is that we haven't heard from the experts now on the technical military side of this Who am I okay so on those ones we should hear from the military people but it was in that normal sense of law and reading this and so they reported Healdsburg not him doesn't pick the foon you'll understand why sorry please continue okay so I let let me let me let me continue from the 18 the 18 basic is clearly an out stock close accolades yes all right it outs the jurisdiction of our courts it has been improved from what 2018 the 2018 agreement was a logistics support agreement give me 25 25 2015 was a logistics support agreement the US could supply the Ghana Armed Forces with logistics and vice versa in fact for money for money so how do you compare to an agreement doesn't that follow okay thank you sorry that diplomatic yes doesn't that automotive the tradition of the course even if you don't write it okay you come to address the issue of diplomatic immunity so 18 clearly was not captured in the if you look at the Vienna Convention itself and as you should look at the Vienna Convention and you'll notice that there are conditions which even the diplomatic immunity granted two diplomats could be waived by their countries well no well no no country's complicated well settle conditions are met yes so it's not a Steve on your granted diplomatic immunity it is all in or you see so but let me continue right as you have your challenge so ATP is an out stop clause if it is it forms the basis for the ouster of the fundamental rights of all countries that have entered into similar agreements with the United States of America and that is our beef he mentioned a number of countries Estonia why Estonia has done what they have done because of the fear of invasion by their former bosses the Russians what is our fear what is our fear you go to the Philippines and see what is happening there are a series of demonstrations on boil because of the violation of the fundamental rights of the citizens who cannot even access the courts to adjudicate their rights is that what we want to do in Ghana but let me take you to another very important article which doesn't find then after expression in end of the agreement rest after that'll be the finish they realized a point demonstrating the differences yes then you not tell us why he he lied or was untruthful when he said we were bound by this previous agree right right let's go to seven a pre positioning and storage of equipment supplies and material spelt the American Way the United States forces are hereby authorized to pre position and store defense equipment supplies and material at a great facilities and areas the pre position material of United States forces and their grid facilities and areas or portions thereof designated for storage of such pre position materia shall be for the exclusive use of United States forces United States forces shall retain title to and control over the use of preposition material and shall have the right to remove such items on the territory of Ghana the material has not been defined in disagreement even do there is an interpretation article so what's the big danger is that they what we have done could allow the Americans to bring into this country nuclear weapons chemical weapons and you know the dangers associated with that you know the dangerous you know the dangerous you know what is happening in Syria with chemical weapons so you cannot go into an agreement which has the use of terminology that you know next to nothing about and I interrogated the generals who appear before us and nobody had to prove as to what much including the Honorable Minister regarding the exact meaning of material so this is a fundamental difference between this but at the one of us agreement that we went into but but why the suspicion and is it not extreme in the manner that you you purport to interpret that's why close why why if you have an article which purports to grant relate this disease whatever because we're talking about defensive could burn supplies and material what is the meaning of material and fact muk muk look at the disparity what will it's not give us an example what would trigger or inform bringing in will be used as a launch pad to invade other countries or governments in this country could even be toppled and we've seen that happen elsewhere why I mean let's say this in I mean in in all truth and sincerity you know what happened in could've WA the French military based in Abidjan over to a certain government so why today we understood a topography today things could fears oh but they're genuinely fears because it's happened before we should be guided by lessons in history shouldn't we be guided by lessons in history Sam sir we should in Panama a sitting president was arrested why why was why do you think it was easy for it for for for for his errors to have been affected it is probably because we had military facilities of the kind that we intend to grant them access to in this country that is why ghanians think okay the minority felt strongly that with all these positions taken into consideration they come to the VA report that you we're part of a minority yes but now demonstrate to us why you say he is wrong or the ministry is wrong when they say Ghana was already bound by previous agreements I haven't said that that's the key point we started my introduction I mean what are you consent yes and you name - no I I son we're still where she where the questioning of sameness or similarity here and that it is binding well no I'm talking about this because he made the argument that the hands of ghanians was tied yes you see and so there was no way there was nothing that could be done about this agreement and so when I said that that particular accession is an untruth it's based on the fact that this is an agreement in his own ways that they negotiated various ministries they are telling General's Department Ministry of Interior Foreign Affairs came together and negotiated you could do bound but there will be room for a negotiation the previous agreements I have demonstrated are not the same this particular that agreement that is you can't compare I mean logistics you have faltered in logistics support of the binding nature of those agreements is faulty demonstrate that it is some citizen I think maybe we didn't understand ourselves okay I have never run away from the fact that there is in existence and operation in 1998 agreement I have never said any way that the 2015 agreement was no sign between the two countries I have sought to distinguish the 2015 agreement by stating that that was a logistics logistics support agreement which has no bearing whatsoever on this particular agreement that we passed yesterday okay 98 agreement yes there are some similarities but fundamental differences right okay and so it is the fundamental differences that I have been handed you say to one other critical points that they tell you that in this agreement they have introduced a termination clause which never existed so we are we are improved so this in fact is an enhanced receipts agreement that there's a termination clause good they can get up to date as Ghana yes we can get up today and say yes we don't want this anymore yes and by the provision yes you don't need to assign reason for the termination yes all you need to give is one year's notice in in in international diplomacy and mind you the 98 agreement was struck through the exchange of diplomatic notes so with those exchanges it is the easiest way to exit it takes another exchange of a diplomatic note to have termination okay you see so it was not agreed and agreement you know such as this and at times you know you know you know these things came about as a result of the JIT Muthu case yes so when the Minister speaks as though he was magnanimous to the people of Ghana and therefore had to bring this before Parliament I mean less you're saying that but but for the Supreme Court's decision in the gate mode yes we're all would not have taking this soup absolutely because in 2001 they also two exchanges of diplomatic notes had similar arrangements in place did they bring them before Parliament so when the minister sits here and tries to create the impression that he has been magnanimous to the people of Ghana by ensuring that this agreement was brought before Parliament for Parliament to pass so we should score him higher max it is not true he did that because he was bound to do that in the light of the GTO to case he had no choice in the matter that is the point that means to be stressed do you see okay so let's say if materially yes they are not exactly different so to speak why would you insist that we are selling the poverty we are compromising our subsidies of radiation I know the view that the differences are fundamental I have been consistent in in making my case about the fundamental differences and impeded access you don't find that in they developed the exchange of diplomatic moods we have so kids know I know I know that message to repositioning pre positioning of material that could be atomic bombs chemical weapons you don't find that in the 98 agreement you don't find a clear that our stock laws of the jurisdiction of our court in the 98 agreement which forms the basis for the authorization right we have just shown here this that this is an improved version of that I made west and enhanced relation in articular new and improved version where in article 18 they now provide that unless otherwise mutually agreed then we can go to court but the previous wonder we are speaking about you could not go to court at all you see it was better that the 98 Agreement came in the form of diplomatic notes you see it was far far far better because when you have exchanges in diplomatic notes it's a different ball game the entire agreement okay it's governed by mutual consent partisans of and that is why that is why you don't even find in that agreement fact that you knew you cut the national loss of one country would not apply you don't find that stated anyway if you come back to the 2015 agreement there are provisions which clearly points to the fact that the parties had the full list of respect for the national laws of either country Sarah which outline your limit let me read article three they agree is designated designed to facilitate reciprocal logistical support no no not that one let me take you to this atom of quickly you're sure you haven't seen similar ones in this one yes research history because the preamble shows all activities of the parties and the disagreement and implementing arrangements shall be carried out in accordance with their respective national laws and regulations respective national laws and regulations listen listen oh listen to this one I'm saying the preamble read the preamble the government of the United States of America here and hereafter the United States and the government of the Republic of Ghana hereafter Ghana hereafter referred to collectively as a party's and singularly as a party desiring to conclude an agreement contributing to enhance security cooperation between the parties and recognizing and recognizing that such cooperation is based on full respect for the sovereignty of each party reaffirming the strong defense relationship between the parties based on a shared commitment to peace and stability and you read further something but how can you talk about respect for sovereignty when clearly in 18 you are saying that should not be amenable to the jurisdiction thank you here is about how come to us the Minister for now let's not take advantage you know any residue and respond to claim it now oh wow kuku has done more than annotation of the agreements in photos okay let's see I'll do yourself 20 fish you soon but permit me to ascertain and nothing really changes everything nothing really changes in this country I heard him talk about 2001 I'm not too sure what he was referring to but you see we are experiencing the same old story again recycling a certain same old story in 2003 the quad mist regime brought to Parliament the agreement or non Saranda nonce around agreement between the Ghana government and the United States collimate I don't know if you recall that it was signed in April 2003 plus executor by the circuit II and brought to Parliament in October at a time the nakawara was the Minister for Foreign Affairs and you have to read the hand side of that day the day of approval Texas October 2003 beyond that you have to go for all the media publications and the public statements that were made that set into oppression the myth of a United States military base in Ghana the word categorical statements made by our friends in the minority then the NDC and the Allied groups some went on demonstrations held rallies our family and the rest and claimed all those military base in family or some way the nothing regional the Minister of Defense then led by Abdul Ghafoor issued statements denied they would not agree look for four long years this country was agitated on the issue of whether or not there was a US military base he he took President Bush to come 2007 below if you remember even that they refused the idea was that there was a u.s. based in Ghana today I hear them say yes this agreement is bringing us many days to Ghana so there was nothing so there was none then but we wasted precious time and space for long years agitating scaremongering not fantastic glories we've just been told that nuclear weapons might be brought in scare people oh let everybody who run into a hold we did not we also do import well yeah when you are signing an agreement you make sure it's what a tight you take care of your interest don't leave any specifics I'm just telling you how we do what we've been doing to ourselves so that if in the instead of having informed discussions based on facts and things of empirical evidential value what we do is to throw out all sorts of things I said it here it's emotions without the benefit of intellect and devoid of knowledge they told us that agreement bring the terrorists into Ghana Scott mongering they also said we have sold our sovereignty for four million dollars it's all yet assume people were talking to me and that if they came to power they were not agreement as you say it's all here in your friend to a hands out of when the hand side captures the process in Parliament right but the newspaper publications or two I brought yeah that's what I mean I just want you to put on record which is behind you by 2003 thank you I still do I have the committee's report here everything is here but even the communities were was caps also only captured in the hand side all right they told us we had sold our sovereignty for four million dollars because of the effect of this agreement today they say we are reselling the sovereignty the sovereignty that we sold we are now selling you see what I'm trying to point as a mix to many myths too many false premises i interject head in serious discussions of this sort and then there's no confirmed perspective it's dangerous especially issues like this I'm not professionally technically competent when it comes to these issues so perhaps you may say that only less talking also as a citizen there are people who can deal with this issues very well but democracy is such that there's a wider space so here we are albums also have also been invited to discuss Sola as preceded I've discussed issues on tax and I got to know that you spoke to the for most taxpayers in this country before you came here so please PLEASE expose him ID when he says what you said don't don't believe you I do so good I do so because he I realized that the audience people were listening that's what one look better than us look is sitting here and I'm sure he doesn't like what I'm going to see he's one of those I consult when it comes to legal issues because I have to that's not my field so I must tap on different ideas then I put them together I criticize I look at which way I think I can based on my conviction and conscience articulate I say defensive end times I've met dismiss a you articulated a better legal position than some lawyer to do I'm humbled to hear they're so good now terrorists will come into town because of them that like remained and this one too we are being told I hear them I had him say something about mission specific and they talk about the 2015 one and they were bold enough to tell all of us that it was because of Boko Haram the Americans came here they wanted to go help Nigeria to fight Boko Haram which is across just across so the Capricia however limited was not going to attract Boko Haram's attention they don't have intelligence networks now Oh gonna give America the base to come and fight them I'm trying to put you the mystical elements in what they put out but we have three agreements we are discussing here and the earth question is are they the same I did not the same let me tell you something I did same thing different same thing different because animal I have a letter here huh this letter is dated 7a June 1st 2017 we're assigned by the US a masada ec battle is addressed to my friend new let's read carefully is this in December 2015 the US government proposed the defense cooperation agreement as a way to facilitate a closer relationship between our two militaries and elevate our partnership operative word elevate so is an enhancement this agreement provides the legal foundation for enhanced security cooperation and a new boost a broad range of defense related activities between between us and Hansen our partnership John says specifically our proposed agreement won't one lay the foundation for enhanced defense relationship to upgrade our existing 1998 state of forces agreement in recognition of this enhanced partnership upgrade our existing so the 1998 one as at the point this letter was berating was deemed to be subsisting or is it existing in the lawyers would use the right way 3 provide US forces access to certain facilities in Ghana enable them to make improvements and continue our cooperative activities this new agreement conforms to standardized provisions in Essos so far that is a status forces agreement we already have with many global partners including the United Kingdom techy and several Hawass countries this agreement NIDA establishes nor seeks to establish a US military base in Ghana the agreement will cover our existing military operation and new yes new initiatives such as the West African logistics network and assistance related to Danis participation in exercise United Accord 2018 Mercedes same thing different is this there are different elements different times different circumstances enhancement so obviously it cannot be in exactitude in terms of exactitude the same but our friends are creating the impression that on everything in the new one actually announced something extraordinary and unprecedented mirela 17 different the tax exemptions when a note in the 1998 one I did not in the 2015 one go to 2015 page 7 article waived or excluded cost why do you read a he so fast national laws and regulations permit the party shall show that any readily identifiable duties taxes and similar charges are not imposed on activities conducted under this agreement is this not a form of Taxation for us national laws and regulations permit but yes I dream ended are you sign please I'm not a lawyer but once you sign the agreement in any case please diplomatic immunity it's in the 1998 one it's also in 2015 and it's also in 2018 diplomatic communities because of time I can't read because I think so much are even come up diplomatic immunities it's in the 1998 one it's in the 2018 one the issue of death and a team is ready earlier both governments with a me it's here it's in 1998 it's also implicating then I asked myself so what is the problem that our friends have because if you read the statement issued a press release and according to them the tax exemptions were an extraordinary of a journalist concession than a Godman ASCII we are not even supposed to inspect what they are bringing so how do you know how you're going to deal with those tea that's why I said some of those things we are limited but I can tell importation and exportation you won't inspect the same thing in 1998 and therefore first of all there is the element of trust and everything but at a port not subjected to the routine normal customs inspection for good security reasons I can understand those things we are talking of building capacity training each other to fight certain traits there people have we also have intelligence networks if you subject those things to their normal routine customs inspection the likelihood of leakages or somebody else looking into is there these are high level things but don't forget the facilities that we've agreed on well we have combined exercises and things at that point in time Demian you intelligence agencies move what has been brought in it's part of the protective shield there's no dangerous not to say what you are bringing in who know even inspect oh I'm telling you and and the question that arises a Gamecock who is this yes previously we have had similar you know engagements and agreements but it never came to the public attention oh it is now the public is becoming aware of the content exact of these things and the public says no the public I'm not sure understand the field but I'm not sure they understand the full remet of this issue they feel and if the public are scared I can understand it is when my brother James is engaging scaremongering that I could test so you agree with aids that we ought to have delayed this this parliamentary Russia erotic ratified it is a legitimate concern you can race I don't think it's a fatal injury but is a legitimate concern I will not attack that because that's part of the democratic framework that we are dealing with so now our representatives to scrutinize care we know but I'm telling you agree in principle but if it's not a fake is ok that's my view and we are here now post the education looking at it it still has a certain therapeutic effect in the sense that dependent on what we say don't forget we've given us a one year within which you can decide to pull out if you decide to pull out I write that Lucas because of things that perhaps is them who point out later well it's a basis for us to exercise that option but I see honestly having been here for a long time I'm not scared okay I'm not scared up at all all right you see my brother was referring to something about exchanges of moods and that's funny very interesting get Muthu he says that is why this went to a lemon but I've proved to you that 2003 there was no good motive but a government took this an agreement to Parliament anyway good lutein FedEx has only reinforced that point that we shouldn't take chances okay but 2003 there was no good mood to go far worse Foreign Minister signs nothing to Parliament but but substantively also is that there were several updates that the previous government or the government which is now in power or the part which is like power never to to power one he mentioned 2001 the thing is mm okay he tooted their humanitarian team mm it's not 2001 I'm sure he was referring to this one that knows her and I agreement I see the note is it not verbal oh yeah you know what that is a certain format the use but did you see that this here the last paragraph for the American side this if the foregoing is acceptable to the government of Ghana the embassy has the honor to propose that this lose together with the ministry's reply shall constitute an agreement between the governments which enter which are entered into force on the day of the ministry's reply now all you have to be used to go and America was dated nineteen Jean while huh January 19 1998 now when you come to the attachment which is from the Ghana side after god Ghana's I did was Yuri copied they just recopy their American one then they come to this point and this is the critical point the Minister of Foreign Affairs has the feather honour to inform the Embassy of the United States that the proposal set forth in the embassies not acceptable to the government of Ghana and to confirm that the embassy salute and this moot shall constitute an agreement between our two governments which I entered into force on this date so and I'm doing here what is a very uneducated so if he says because they are nuts you guys Lee pull out I said move it means if you say no to them they must respond to your lute okay you so you can't pull out unilaterally suggested that's the point that's the point I believe that the greater credit goes to those who bring such things to Parliament whether a court order or not once it gets to Parliament the people of this country and our representatives in Parliament have been given the chance to interrogated but isn't it the case that unilaterally can pull out except that there'll be legal consequences yes but if you can't but but he was creating the impression that it's just a one-sided some poo straight forward we all right okay and that's that's not reflection a reflection of how this tea is whack okay so this what I'm going to do Google yes I'm taking a break here we will return and when we return we are going to hear the minister look at all other matters residual that has come forward and answer the people's question what is in it for Ghana we'll be right back [Music]

Channel: JoyNews

Views: 52,631

Rating: 4.2509961 out of 5

Keywords: Ghana Political Issues, ghana Politics, Matters Arising in Ghana, NPP, CPP, PPP, National Budget, Chieftancy, Ghanaian lawyers, Economy, Constitution, Election, campaign, youtube, joy news, newsfile

Id: ojyt_AcTnG4

Length: 87min 28sec (5248 seconds)

Published: Sat Mar 24 2018