@RedHatPentester You wouldn't even cos much harm when you compromise aku...it's the AI they claim to use to determine the cost of import duties...imagine someone compromising that
Your point is, you’re enforcing already existing legislations and not a Bill. But as someone with legal knowledge and a legislator too, you definitely know and the courts have cemented into public knowledge that existing legislation can be wrong and can be criticized.
NPP v IGP. The IGP was enforcing existing legislation (Public Order Act) to restrict people from embarking on demonstrations without his permit. Supreme Court struck down those provisions.
Mensima v Ag. Existing L.I stated that one must be part of a cooperative society to be granted a license to be a local distiller. Court struck down that provision.
Martin Kpebu v Ag. Existing legislation that’s the Criminal Procedure Act stated that one cannot be granted bail for certain severe offenses. The Supreme Court over fifty years later struck down that provision.
When your response is that you’re just enforcing an existing legislation, any citizen of Ghana who is adversely affected by that legislation can bring an action to strike it down as breaching the constitution or administrative power.
Even in the case of Ghana Independent Broadcasters Association v NMC, the court struck down existing regulations that sought to censor and restrict the broadcasting content of independent broadcasters.
Infact common sense makes it clear that only existing legislations can be problematic.
In the case of Amanda Odoi v Ag as well as Richard Sky v Ag the court held it is not Bills but existing legislation that can be questioned by citizens in the public interest.
Ghanaians have a right to question, critique and even challenge existing legislation in court. They don’t have to be IT experts to challenge a law you think only affects IT experts.
The law potentially affects every prospective IT specialist and every single Ghanaian who will utilize those services because we will pay the extra costs when these license costs and restrictions are imposed on them, because WE are the final consumers.
Administrative fairness under the Wednesbury case principle mandates that the administrative body will be REASONABLE if it considers all that it ought to take into consideration.
On one hand you were fighting exorbitant DSTV prices for the “people” because it benefited your mandate. On the other hand you’re now imposing exorbitant fees on the same people you’re going to release as coders and such costs will be transferred to every Ghanaian.
The former government did not impose such fees under the existing law because it would’ve been unreasonable and harsh to do so.
You’re known for many things but you’re not known for passing and enforcing unreasonable laws or?