E-Levy Debate: Minority Sides With Ghanaians - John Jinapor

[@samuelowusu4755]

I do not support E Levy but Ghana does not have a good system to collect taxes so I will support it .

[@ezekielannanyartey845]

They may have accepted E-levy, but we can reject it!

[@niikwartei]

How...? After paying for 3 years

[@justicefiadjoe4289]

Akyem sakawa boys...

[@otidarkotv7016]

himmm Ghana 🇬🇭

[@martintawiah8002]

The headlines is quite partisan.. It should be some Ghanaians

[@mamasolomon5949]

Hmmmm Asem ooo

[@mandelafrimpong3850]

Listen, this NPP and NDC are not on the side of this nation but they are rather there for their own self-interests.

[@wasawawawasa8307]

Disappointed NPP supporter, looking for cover.

[@Subs-ProjectX]

Hmmm

[@dominicinkoom8583]

I still don't understand why u have to walk out for them to pass this evil levy.. Pathetic

[@hajiag854]

because the use the court to reduce their nom. they are now 136 instead of 137 and that was the best option as at then?

[@Ghanafirsttv]

Dumsor koraa people never complained jon

[@sammytuga5327]

Am very happy paaa.now everyone in gh will pay tax.

[@opare424]

And your leaders will chop it. May God have mercy on this wicked leaders

[@sammytuga5327]

@@opare424 we hold dem accountable if dey fail to do de right tin with de e levy

[@a.walker1628]

@@sammytuga5327 have u seen a political leader being jailed in Ghana before? U must be crazy...holding who accountable?

[@sammytuga5327]

@ A Walker ur parent ar de one crazy.

[@comfortabbey7066]

Eish, E levy bill

[@isaacdonkor6255]

Thieves...Collect the e levy and share as well among yourselves

[@wisdommensah3997]

Well spoken… Ah NPP paa

[@wisdommensah3997]

Very disappointed in Nana

[@samuelabbew5149]

We don't want this so called e-lavy. You( NPP) claim you want to serve us yet you are imposing a bill on us. This is insensitive

[@kwakuboatboat9258]

Where is the money

[@patosepo9344]

NDC again is wrong seeking misapplication of rules and laws from Abdulai SC ruling. 1. SC declared in Abdulai interpretation that standing orders of Parliament must agree with constitution. 2. Parliament is still the master of its own proceedings. It was not the SC duty to count who was in the house and who was not in the house. 3. It was also not the duty of the SC to take over the role of parliament to supervise and demand the quorum of its sittings. What are MPs paid for? The SC to do their work for them?. The SC is called to intervene to interprets the constitution . Parliament must still do its own nitty gritty. 3. The Parliament has the procedure to challenge and determine whether there is quorum and when and where and how to do that challenge. The SC has not taken over parliament to temper with the procedure. 4. Abdulai SC case sought to clarify who constitute a quorum of the parliament. 5. NDC is confused. It has no case. What do they want from SC? When to determine a quorum, or where to determine a quorum or how to determine a quorum? This is Parliamentary business which Abdulai case changed nothing from it. Abdulai case addressed who constitute a quorum. 6. NDC is in the wrong place if they want amendments about when, where, and how to determine a quorum . This is parliamentary work. SC will come in only when it is done wrong and the SC is invoked. But that is too late for E- Levy.

[@selormsalvation1374]

I think Nana is very sick and madness

[@macedoniamandney8255]

You guys are all the same Very disappointed in them all

[@rexfordoppongdeezy7637]

akyem people will always disappoint you 😁

[@ericasare7733]

Hmmm