The National Democratic Congress (NDC) has moved to clarify confusion over its lawyers representing former New Patriotic Party (NPP) appointees facing corruption charges, firmly dismissing claims of “deal-cutting.”

Abraham Amaliba, NDC’s Director of Conflict Resolution, clarified that comments made by General Secretary Fifi Kwetey at a meeting of NDC lawyers were a misunderstanding of the lawyers’ professional duty.

Professional Duty vs. Party Loyalty

Speaking on Joy News’ PM Express, Mr. Amaliba stressed that when an NDC-affiliated lawyer represents a former NPP official, they are merely performing their professional duty as a lawyer and not engaging in any “backroom deal-cutting” for political favors.

“The General Secretary’s comments at the Kumasi meeting of the NDC lawyers was not to say that there were NDC lawyers cutting deals… as a lawyer, anybody can come for your services, and you may choose to represent the person or not.”

He explained that a lawyer found in such a case is simply “working as a lawyer simplicita” to ensure their client gets their freedom, a principle every lawyer will uphold regardless of political affiliation.

The “Chicken and Egg” Situation

While defending the professional right to represent any client, Mr. Amaliba, who also serves as the Acting Director-General of the National Road Safety Authority, acknowledged the political sensitivity of such cases.

He cautioned that NDC lawyers who hold government positions must be mindful of public perception when accepting cases involving former officials being prosecuted by the current administration. Taking on such cases, though legally permissible, risks being “construed like the way the General Secretary misconstrue the conduct of those lawyers to mean that you are cutting them.”

Mr. Amaliba revealed that the issue was debated among NDC lawyers, and the overwhelming consensus was for members of the party to avoid taking up such politically charged cases to prevent misinterpretation and safeguard the party’s image.

He admitted the situation presents a tough ethical and political balance: “It’s a dicey thing. It’s a chicken and egg situation. You may say that is where you get your daily bread so why would you turn it down? But again, you have to also think about the larger interest of the party.”