This is the most soundest discussion I have heard since this whole thing broke. 🌹🌹🌹 The 2 professors are very sound minds. 🎉 🌹🌹🌹
@broaikings9527
3 сағат бұрын
great analysis from both of them
@brightattor896
Сағат бұрын
Is it not proper to say Article 97 (1)g and h was designed to take care of what happened in the 1960 parliament and even what is happening now? I say this in response to what Prof. Gyampo says about the antecedent happening that brought about this article. The spirit of the law may be traced to the cross carpeting events that happened, but any act that changes your status as we have it in this situation can also not be excused. Whether we want to see them change seats or not, these people have changed positions on their status, and by so actions, the manner they do business in this house will be affected. Some of them aggrieved, some of them have been lured. Which ever way you look at it, they aren’t the same people anymore. It affects their way of doing business.
Пікірлер: 3