Ghana faces parliamentary paralysis as Akufo-Addo enters second term

After a disputed election, bitter relations between political parties and a hung Parliament will test governance processes.

On 4 March, Ghana’s Supreme Court unanimously ruled to uphold the second term victory of president Nana Akufo-Addo in the 7 December 2020 general elections. Akufo-Addo’s opponent and immediate past predecessor John Dramani Mahama, who had challenged the results in court and argued for a rerun, criticised the decision. 

He and his main opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) party, said the presidential and parliamentary results were rigged for Akufo-Addo and the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP). They accused Ghana’s Electoral Commission of bias and incompetence. 

The situation sets the stage for possible paralysis in government decision making in parliament. It also raises the risk of more inter-party acrimony that could provoke violence before and after the 2024 elections in which Mahama may run.  

In the short term, the Akufo-Addo government won’t have the numbers to pass its legislative agenda. The NPP and the NDC each hold 137 of the 275 seats in parliament, with the remaining one held by independent Andrew Asiamah Amoako of the Fomena constituency. The NPP expelled Amoako following a controversial party primary and his decision to run as an independent.

Ghana operates a semi-parliamentary system that obligates presidents to appoint the majority of ministers from parliament. This approach means the government will need the NDC’s support in approving bills because members of parliament (MPs) who double as ministers are often not present to vote due to their ministerial duties. 

Experts interviewed by the Institute for Security Studies (ISS) said this could constrain governance if the NDC decides to obstruct government business in the chamber. The opposition party may use this strategy to frustrate the NPP and score political points ahead of the 2024 elections. Inter-party relations are already bitter, as was displayed during the chaotic election of a new Speaker on 7 January when MPs from both sides openly brawled with each other. 

Some NDC MPs and senior figures have hinted that parliament will not readily approve bills and agreements submitted by the executive. Haruna Iddrisu, NDC parliamentary leader, has warned that the party’s MPs, who occupy 13 out of the 26 seats on the chamber’s vetting committee, won’t approve more than 70 ministers and deputies. Akufo-Addo has indicated that up to 85 are to be appointed. 

On 1 March, all NDC members on the committee voted to reject Akufo-Addo’s nominees for the agriculture, fisheries and aquaculture, and information ministers on the grounds of dishonesty during their vetting. The three nominees were ultimately approved by the parliamentary plenary after more than 20 NDC MPs voted with their NPP colleagues. 

The vote drew fiery criticism from the NDC’s communications officer and many of the party’s supporters who accused their MPs and the party leadership of betraying a collective cause. This reaction and the call for a leadership change will probably make the NDC cautious in its engagement with the government, experts told ISS Today.

Nonetheless, the hung parliament presents opportunities for better governance and accountability through oversight over the executive. It’s a departure from the past seven parliaments in Ghana’s Fourth Republic (1992 to date), in which governing parties had comfortable majorities, and the executive always had its way. These were, according to experts, ‘rubber-stamp’ parliaments, especially as many MPs were part of the executive as ministers and seldom challenged bills and agreements. 

For the next four years, the government will try to avoid criticism by being more diligent and thorough in presenting budget statements and other vital documents for debate. 

Meanwhile, although the Supreme Court’s ruling hasn’t revived the violent protests that followed the election, the NDC may take a firm position in the next polls. Ghana has a competitive winner-takes-all electoral system. Both the NPP and NDC have mobilised political vigilante groups to attack and intimidate opponents. 

The government outlawed vigilantes in 2019, but experts expressed grave doubts about the political will to enforce the law. They cited the two main parties’ reluctance to sign a code of conduct on peaceful campaigning ahead of the December 2020 elections. 

More than a year after the law was passed, the Ministry of Justice hasn’t issued its enforcement guidelines. For opposition parties that feel the courts won’t afford them justice, vigilantes become a reliable source of security during campaigns.

In addition to their distrust of the Electoral Commission, Mahama and the NDC have subtly expressed their lack of confidence in the independence of state security and justice institutions. Among these bodies are the military, the police and the courts. 

If these vital institutions lack legitimacy, future election disputes may be settled on the street rather than in the courts. The 2024 election will be crucial for the opposition, as observers note that a third consecutive loss would seriously demoralise the party and deepen factional divides. 

Akufo-Addo should adopt a consensus-building approach to governance and ensure opposition views are considered, especially on crucial laws. The Electoral Commission needs to strengthen the Inter-Party Advisory Committee as a platform for consensus and trust-building around election preparations. 

The National Peace Council, which facilitated the signing of the peace accord by Akufo-Addo and Mahama on 4 December 2020, should work with both sides to defuse election-related tensions.

www.samigration.com


Nigeria suspends Emirates flights over COVID-19 tests

ABUJA, March 22 (Reuters) - Nigeria suspended the airline Emirates from flying into or out of its territory last week after the carrier imposed additional COVID-19 test requirements on passengers from the country, the aviation minister said on Monday.

Emirates said last week passenger flights to and from Nigeria had been suspended until further notice in line with government directives, but did not give details.

Aviation minister Hadi Sirika told a news conference that the airline had demanded passengers from Nigeria undertake three COVID-19 tests within 24 hours, leading the government to suspend its operations, with the exemption of cargo and humanitarian flights.

“To make us go through three tests within 24 hours does not make sense. Since they insist, their operations remain suspended,” Sirika said.

Last month Nigeria lifted a suspension of Emirates airlines flights imposed after the carrier sought additional COVID-19 tests for passengers from Nigeria.

In addition to requiring a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test before flying from Nigeria, the airline added an extra requirement of having a rapid test four hours before departure.

www.samigration.com


Government prioritises wealthy investor visas

Money talks if you want permanent residency in Australia.

There has never been a better time for rich foreign investors to buy residency in Australia, after the federal government quietly pushed ultra-wealthy applicants to the front of the line.

An internal document released under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act reveals that in August last year, then-Immigration Minister Alan Tudge directed the Department of Home Affairs to prioritise investor visas over nearly every other type of visa applicant.

The direction, which became effective on September 1, ordered that foreigners willing to invest $5 million or more in Australia be conferred number one status, granting them a fast-track to permanent residency (PR).

The decision places ultra-rich individuals on hallowed footing shared only with two other visa types: those filling the most desperate critical skills shortages the country is facing, as well as internationally-recognised professionals, artists, athletes and academics with an “outstanding” record of achievement.

Home Affairs employees were instructed to secondarily assess those investors willing to stump up $1.5 million or more along with other Business Innovation and Investment Program (BIIP) visas before considering any other visa applications.

The impact has been both immediate and spectacular.

According to a separately obtained document, BIIP visa approvals jumped tenfold to hit almost 750 in September and haven’t faltered in the months since.

Investors to help spur the recovery

The reshuffle confirms the government’s preference for wealthy applicants over other demand-based visa streams.

It speaks volumes given pandemic 408 visas, which are designed to maintain essential personnel in “critical sectors” like healthcare, are now considered secondary to investment.

The decision demonstrates a renewed focus on wealthy investors, who are estimated to have contributed some $1.3 billion to the local economy last year.

The Department of Home Affairs said the growth in the program is “to support Australia’s post-COVID-19 recovery by maximising its economic contribution”.

“[Significant investors] help inject additional funds into the Australian economy including into higher risk investments that support emerging enterprises, the commercialisation of Australian ideas and research and development which is a key aspect of economic recovery,” a spokesperson said.

Australia is not alone in rolling out the red carpet to the rich.

Since the wake of the global financial crisis (GFC), everyone from indebted economies like Portugal and international hubs like Dubai began using visas and residency to woo the wealthy.

Closer to home, New Zealand has leveraged its coronavirus credentials, along with its peace and stability, to promote itself as a destination for the rich.

Scores of Silicon Valley billionaires swapped America for Aotearoa when the pandemic kicked off last year, with the two-island nation offering versions of Australia’s visas for $NZ3 million and $NZ10 million respectively.

However, it has also drawn a line in the sand after Jacinda Ardern’s government rejected a proposal to offer 2,000 visas for $50 million a pop.

“We don’t want people paying for passports,” she said.

Inside the investor migration into Australia

As part of the push, the Australian government doubled the annual cap for investor visas from 6,800 last year to 13,500.

Even with quarantine and flight caps, which have frustrated the 40,000 Australians stranded overseas, visa demand looks set to exhaust the extra supply.

In questions submitted to it, Home Affairs stated that “the majority of the 2020-21 program places” would be allocated to the backlog of applications.

Not that the pandemic hasn’t also helped drive new demand, according to property platform Juwai IQI, which helps investors from China buy property in countries like Australia.

“In the 2019-2020 year, we had more than 1,500 applicants, higher than either of the previous two years,” chairman and co-founder Georg Chmiel said, noting the biggest investors predominantly come from the one region.

“China and Hong Kong account for 88.5% of all Significant Investor Visas that have been granted. Two other Asian countries, Malaysia and Vietnam, are also in the top five.”

Despite the influx of applications, immigration lawyers reported approvals were being finalised in just four months, with the Home Affairs office receiving $1.2 million to help it process BIIP places.

Previously, the same approvals have taken up to two years.

“Processing resources have been redirected from the general skilled migration visas, which do not create jobs, to [significant investor] visas,” Melbourne lawyer Lily Ong said, noting 30,000 other visa places had been cut as part of the shuffle.

It came as part of an overhaul of the visa program implemented during Tudge’s tenure, including increasing the threshold for business innovation visas to a minimum of $1.25 million.

“These changes will maximise the economic contribution of these high value investors to get the best possible outcome for Australians,” Tudge said in a ministerial announcement at the time.

It followed a December review which proposed a range of adjustments, including potentially doubling the $1.5 million investment threshold for regular investor visas and incentivising foreigners to invest in regional Australia.

Property the biggest winner

However, for all the talk of innovation and business investment, it is the property market that may receive the lion’s share of foreign attention.

Juwai IQI processed 1,500 applicants last year, enough to snap up one-sixth of all investor visas alone. With many Chinese applicants lured by the stability and lifestyle, according to Chmiel, there’s clearly a strong appeal in investing in Australia property in a rising market and becoming a resident.

“Releasing a flood of wealthy investment visa holders into the capital city housing markets could be a boon for vendors of property above $5 million in price,” he said.

“Instead of coming into the market spread out over the next year or two, many are coming all at once.”

The impact of that is already apparent, according to real estate agency Kay & Burton’s international division, as permanent resident visas are also granted in record time.

“Since last year I have had at least five or six clients who literally just got their permanent residency, and there are a few more pending… they weren’t expecting it to come so quickly,” Melbourne-based agency partner Jamie Mi, said, noting some clients are going shopping with upwards of $5 million in affluent suburbs like Toorak.

Permanent resident status, available to visa holders after four years, allows buyers to snap up property without having to fork out exorbitant fees.

“Another client came to me three days ago. They haven’t got their PR [permanent residency] yet, and if they buy now they would have to pay the stamp duty and get FIRB approval. Based on the $6 million to $8 million value they are looking at, that would mean paying the government a half million in fees,” Mi said.

“If you get your permanent residency, that half million dollars lets you get more value in the best suburbs. So, with the faster visa processing, we have an immediate increase in demand in these key suburbs

www.samigration.com


Home Affairs plans to go ‘paperless’ in South Africa – here are the changes you can expect

Home Affairs minister Aaron Motsoaledi says that his department is working on a number of tech-focused features, with plans to take some services digital.

Answering in a recent written parliamentary Q&A, Motsoaledi said that the department will also introduce a number of changes which are aimed at increased identity security for citizens.

“The department has partnered with the Department of Health (DoH) to ensure that each child is allocated with a birth certificate on the spot, by registering birth at health facilities.

“This will curb identity theft from the onset as an ID number gets allocated and remains with the child for life. The primary purpose is to ensure a credible population register, not vulnerable to theft and fraud.”

With ‘live capture’, Motsoaledi said that the department is able to identify applicants through online verification which has a direct interface with the Home Affairs National Identification System (HANIS) to identify persons through biometrics.

“Furthermore, during the collection of smart identity cards, online verification is also performed to ensure that the correct enabling document is handed over to the appropriate clients.”

Motsoaledi said that the South African Smart ID card and passport also have enhanced security features.

“The department is moving away from paper to a paperless environment. The department is thereby progressively phasing out the manual application process,” he said.

“In addition, in terms of the Departments’ Information Security Policy, a model was built around proactive risk assessment and risk management where all users responsible for registering and capturing births and identity-related applications within the domain of the organization, are assigned with biometric fingerprint authentication, to detect and hold users accountable for fraudulent activities.”

Services available

Home Affairs announced the resumption of a number of services under South Africa’s level 1 lockdown at the start of March.

This comes after several services were temporarily suspended due to concerns around Covid-19 transmissions.

The following services are now available: 

  • Births registration;
  • Re-issuance of births certificates;
  • Late Registration of Birth (LRB) for learners and pensioners only;
  • Death registration;
  • Applications temporary identity certificate (TIC);
  • Collection of identity cards or documents;
  • Applications and collection of passports for those who are exempted to travel;
  • Applications for identity (Smart ID) cards or documents for matriculants only;
  • Re-issues of Smart ID cards and identity documents;
  • Registration and solemnization of marriages;
  • Amendments and rectifications;
  • Late Registration of Birth (LRB) for all categories;
  • Applications and collections of passports for all categories.

“We urge everyone who visits our offices to observe social distancing, sanitise their hands regularly and to wear their masks properly, covering their noses and mouths,” Motsoaledi said.

“Nobody will be allowed into our offices if they are not wearing their masks properly,” he said.

www.samigration.com


Department of Home Affairs continues to flout refugee court orders, year after year

Home Affairs still does not serve new applicants in Cape Town despite a Supreme Court of Appeal ruling that says it must reopen and maintain a fully functional refugee reception office.

Still no functional refugee reception office in Cape Town nor evidence of future progress.

Nearly two years have passed since the Department of Home Affairs promised to open a Cape Town Refugee Reception Office (CTRRO) once again, and nearly a decade has passed since it decided in 2012 to stop processing new asylum applications in Cape Town.

In a judgment on 30 August 2012, the Western Cape high court ordered Cape Town Home Affairs to start serving new applicants again. The judge said the cost to Home Affairs of assisting newcomers was negligible compared to the harm done to them.

The court said delaying implementation of the court order would cause grievous harm to asylum seekers. While undocumented, they would be subject to arrest and deportation.

Yet Home Affairs proceeded to drag the matter through the courts until in September 2017, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) ruled that Home Affairs must “reopen and maintain a fully functional refugee reception office in or around the Cape Town Metropolitan Municipality by 31 March 2018.”

Home Affairs sought leave to appeal from the Constitutional Court but this was refused. This means the SCA ruling is final.

In January 2019, GroundUp reported that Home Affairs, which by then was already in contempt of the court order, said a site in Maitland had been identified by the Department of Public Works and the proposed date for the office to be occupied was 1 June 2019, according to the Legal Resource Centre (LRC).

In July 2019, the LRC requested Home Affairs submit a detailed plan for the new office, including updated timelines and the reason for missing its June deadline.

Last week, Petra Marais, attorney at LRC, said Home Affairs had sent reports every three to six months, instead of the monthly reports ordered by the Supreme Court of Appeal in 2017.

Marais said, “The last report received from Home Affairs for the period of August 2020 to January 2021 advised that Home Affairs together with the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure has put out another tender during 2020 for new premises for the CTRRO, and from the bids received have now identified a premise in Epping.”

“The LRC has not received updated timelines nor a list of tasks completed during this time. From the reports filed by Home Affairs we were notified that the reason the previous premises fell through was that the landlord could not deliver on all the requirements set by Home Affairs. The Department of Public Works and Infrastructure thereafter advised Home Affairs that the tender process has ‘restarted from scratch’. We were given no reason as to why the tender process had to restart since the Department received five tenders from its 2018 bid, and therefore had four more tenders to consider.”

Marais said the reports filed by Home Affairs “still fail to provide us with timelines, adequate direction and sufficient information for why the Department is not complying with the SCA order”.

Despite various announcements by Home Affairs, refugees and asylum seekers have been struggling to access services for almost a decade now, and the situation became worse when the pandemic struck.

At present, Home Affairs in Cape Town only renews asylum documents and refugee statuses for people who originally applied in Cape Town.

With lockdown in March last year, services were suspended and Home Affairs declared an automatic renewal of documentation. At present, asylum seeker permits that expired, or were due to expire during lockdown, are valid until 31 March 2021.

Last year, the Scalabrini Centre said it is concerned about the number of refugees and asylum seekers with expired documents, and that the Department of Home Affairs has not made public any plans about dealing with the disruption caused by Covid-19.

GroundUp has tried to get comment from Home Affairs spokesperson Siya Qoza and media manager David Hlabane since 17 March.

www.samigration.com