When Ghana News Agency interacted with a cross-section of the public, in Accra, on Thursday, some Ghanaians said the demands made in the Presidential Transition 2012, (Act 845) must be reviewed and standardised for every regime.

Article 71 office holders include the President, the Vice President, the Speaker of Parliament, Members of Parliament, Ministers of State, political appointees, and some public servants whose salaries are charged on the Consolidated Fund and enjoyed certain privileges.

While some absolutely criticised the levels of the resources involved, saying it was major drain on the economy, others said the beneficiaries deserved the awards.  Mr Isaac Anderson, a public servant, said the country was resource-constrained, therefore, it should not waste public resources on any Former President’s accommodation.

This is because every President received an appreciable level of income, which should enable him or her to be in the position to build a house.  “Even an ordinary person with a meagre income can save towards building his/her own house, how come a President who during his active service enjoys a lot of privileges and benefits such as free accommodation, transportation, and utilities,  ask the taxpayers to provide him/her with an accommodation after his retirement,” he queried.

He wondered why some classes of citizens were considered more important than others and were paid retirement benefits every four years, while others worked for 30 and more years but went home with meagre retirement packages.

He said: “There is too much discrimination with regard to the expenditure of the public resources and the rich-and-powerful always get what they want, while the underprivileged wallow in abject poverty.”

However, Madam Gifty Ankomah, who sells palm fruits,  said since the law had made provision for the country to provide every former president and some public officials certain facilities and privileges, it must be complied with so that nobody would accuse the sitting President of bias.

She referenced a Bible verse, saying: “Give what belongs to Caesar, and give what belongs to God to him.” Opanyin Kwesi Anyimah, a bag repairer at the Tema Station in Accra, suggested a review of the law so that all former presidents would be paid a one-time pension instead of retiring on their salaries.

Madam Millicent Konadu, a maize seller at the Kantamanto Market, said it was necessary to provide security and vehicles to a former president, but not a  building. Madam Akosua Bokoma, a teacher, said the emoluments of a former president were intended to maintain the dignity of the Office of the President in order to respond  positively to post-presidential life, but the house should be returned to the State upon his or her demise.

 The Professor Dora Francisca Edu-Buandoh Committee, constituted in 2015, was tasked to review the emoluments and retirement benefits of Article 71 office holders, including that of former presidents. The Committee recommended that the former President should not be given a house in Accra and another location of his choice outside the capital, as had been recommended by previous committees.

Instead, he or she should rather receive 40 per cent of the salary to be paid monthly.

The Professor Ewurama Addy and the Chinery - Hesse Committees, were also constituted in 2008 and 2010, to make their recommendations in line with Constitutional provisions. The proponents of the emoluments are of the view that on a continent where leaders entrench themselves in power for varied reasons, including corruption, when Ghana’s leaders are adequately incentivised they would resist the corruption temptation and readily leave office at the end of their terms.