By: Winstanley R. Bankole Johnson

If APC are not careful SLPP will cause them/us to begin to wash their faces going upwards instead of downwards aa is normal. And that could easily sound the APC Party’s death knell – killing it once and for all as the SLPP are hoping for.

For starters for the kind of independence contemplated for the Tripartite Investigative Committee the State House Press Secretary has absolutely no business disseminating information on their behalf. The “Committee” ought to have their own Secretariate, independent of possible State House influences or interferences. In short that Tripartite Investigative Committee should have no link or contact with State House.

Further as far as I can recall there is absolutely no provision in the original Bintumani Dialogue Communique for-:

1.  The Tripartite Committee to additionally include broad based stakeholders outside eight (8) nominees apiece from the SLPP, APC and those representing the International Community.

By inference in this Presser from State House/Office of the Presidency, there is a possibility that the so-called broad-based representation contemplated may also mean including/imposing SLPP surrogates into the Core Membership of the Cross-Party Investigative Committee.

That will not only vitiate against the original structure and intent of the Investigative Committee, but will also mitigate the severity or seriousness of their outcomes as in the event votes are required to be taken on particularly issues affecting the legality of the SLPP as a government, the APC will definitely be outvoted

2. Incidentally on what basis or mandate did the APC accede to President Bio incorporating inclusive broad based stakeholders’ representation to this Cross Committee? Why did APC agree to the inclusion of other broad-based stakeholders into that Committee, outside its agreed mandate? Could this not be a deliberately surreptitious move by the SLPP regime to downplay the relevance of the Tripartite Investigative Committee even before commencement of their tasks?

How many of them will be so included to constitute this broad-based numbers? How were/are they selected and will they be actively involved in the deliberations of issues flagged for resolutions and with voting rights too?

3. Per the Bintumani Dialogue outcomes the SLPP, APC and International Community representatives to the Cross-Party Committee are deemed to rank pari-passu with each component having its own Co-Chairperson. So, on that basis there would seem to be no logical need for a formal launching of their tasks by a President the legitimacy of whose authority is still suspect and requires forensic investigations for local and international validation.

Or am I missing insinuations here of the implicit recognition and validation of Bio’s second term presidency by the APC already?

And should (God forbid) that be the case, then why continue with the farce about Cross Paty Investigative Committee?

If the President did not launch the Bintumani Dialogue processes (because he did not have the accepted/ recognized presidential authority), why is it necessary for him to now *launch* the works of a committee that ought inter-alia to be forensically investigating all the processes leading to the announcement of the June 24th multi-tiered election results that are globally deemed to have been falsified and stolen?

And if APC makes the mistake of ever conceding to participate in that scheduled official State House formal launch of the Investigative Committee’s tasks by Dr. Bio, will it not be also expected that on completion of their tasks they will be implicitly obligated to *REPORT that to State House/President Bio who initially launched/commissioned their task, because they were basically working at his behest?

Wake Up APC

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *