The Minister for Finance, Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson, has been dragged before the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) over allegations of selective and biased payment of ex-gratia benefits to the Speaker and Members of Parliament, while excluding those who served in the Executive arm of government.
The complaint, filed by Ghanaian broadcast journalist Wilberforce Asare on 19 December 2025, claims that Dr. Forson, who is also a sitting Member of Parliament, placed himself in a conflict of interest by authorising payments to himself and fellow MPs while leaving other constitutional office holders unpaid.
Jurisdiction and grounds of complaint
In the complaint addressed to CHRAJ Commissioner Joseph Akanjolenur Whittal, Mr. Asare cited Articles 218(a) and (e), 284, 287, and 296 of the 1992 Constitution to justify the Commission’s jurisdiction.
He argued that CHRAJ is empowered to investigate complaints involving corruption, abuse of power, and unfair treatment by public officers.
The complainant contends that the Finance Minister’s actions constitute discrimination, unfair and unreasonable administrative conduct, abuse of discretion, and a conflict of interest.
Details of the alleged bias
According to the complaint, an investigation initiated in October 2025 into the payment of end-of-service benefits for members of the former government revealed that the Speaker and Members of Parliament received their ex-gratia payments in two instalments – in May and July 2025 – covering the period January 2021 to January 2025.
The information was disclosed in a letter from the Clerk of Parliament, Mr. Ebenezer Ahumah Djietror.
While MPs were paid, the complainant claims that members of the former Executive, the Council of State, and the Judiciary, who are equally entitled to benefits under Article 71 of the Constitution, remained unpaid at the time of the complaint.
Mr. Asare said that by facilitating payments to MPs, of whom Dr. Forson is one, the Finance Minister placed himself in a position where his personal financial interest conflicted with his public duties, in violation of Article 284 of the Constitution.
The complaint further cited Article 17 on discrimination, Article 23 on unfair administrative conduct, and Article 296(a) on abuse of discretion, noting that the Minister prioritised the interests of Parliament over other arms of government.
“By authorising payments to MPs while leaving other equally entitled constitutional office holders unpaid, the Respondent preferred his personal interest and that of his occupational class over the interests of other arms of government,” the complaint read.
Reliefs sought
Mr. Asare has asked CHRAJ to investigate Dr. Forson’s conduct, make findings of contravention where established, take appropriate action under Article 287(2), and issue directives necessary to restore constitutional compliance and administrative fairness.
The case now rests with CHRAJ, which will determine whether the Finance Minister’s actions constitute a breach of constitutional and administrative norms, and what remedial action, if any, should be taken.
