▪︎As Gbajabiamila makes case for amendment of Ghana’s GIPC Act

The President of Ghana, Prof. Nana Akufo Ado, has assured the Speaker of Nigeria’s House of Representatives, Femi Gbajabiamila, of the readiness of the Ghanaian lgovernment to consider the resolutions reached at the “Legislative Diplomacy Bilateral Meeting” between Nigeria and Ghana’s senior legislators on 2nd September 2020, at the Ghanaian Parliament House.

The Ghanian President gave the assurance when the Speaker of Ghana’s parliament, Prof. Mike Oquaye, upon completion of the 2-day extensive dialogue, led his Nigerian counterpart on a courtesy visit to the President at the Jubilee House, Accra, Ghana on Thursday.

The legislative diplomacy dialogue became imperative as the parliaments of the two countries sought modalities to resolve challenges and provide an enabling business environment for foreign traders including Nigerians doing business in Ghana.

Several foreign businesses, many Nigerian-owned, in Ghana have been facing challenges following the demand for $1m capital base for foreign traders, as enshrined in the Ghana Investment Promotion Center GIPC Act (2013).

Responding to a request by Nigeria’s Speaker, Femi Gbajabiamila, for a review of the Ghana Investment Promotion Centre (GIPC) Act to make certain concessions, President Akufo-Addo said the request was in order as it “makes a lot of sense”.

The Ghanaian President, who expressed satisfaction with Gbajabiamila’s visit, endorsed his proposal for the establishment of a “Nigeria-Ghana Business Council” established by law in both countries, and he additionally suggested the setting up of a joint ministerial committee between the countries that would “shepherd” issues between Ghana and Nigeria.

He told Gbajabiamila he would also raise the issue with President Muhammadu Buhari “when they meet at the ECOWAS Summit on Monday.”

“I think the way forward, which is really what matters in situations like this, that is being suggested, one that I find very acceptable, the idea of legislation, a Nigeria Ghana business council that will superintendent trade matters and investment matters between our two countries, maybe long overdue.

“The time has come for us to take these worthwhile steps. I suggested to Mr. President that it will be a good idea to set up a joint ministerial committee of ministers from both sides who will be responsible for shepherding Ghana and Nigeria issues, reporting to both presidents at any one time, and that is how they should be resolved.

“I am hoping when I see him on Monday for the ECOWAS summit, we can advance these discussions and come to a final conclusion.

“The way you yourselves have come about this matter is very satisfactory, and it requires our support. The review that you are asking for, why not? if it works in our mutual perspectives, we can take it for granted that your request will be taken seriously. We will have a look at it.

“So, the request for the review makes a lot of sense,” President Akufo-Addo said.

Earlier, Gbajabiamila, who was in the company of some of his colleagues in Nigeria’s House of Representatives, which included the Chairmen of House Committees on Foreign Affairs, Media and Public Affairs , Deputy chairmen of committee on Diaspora , Federal road safety and a member of the ECOWAS Parliament, told the Ghanaian President at the Jubilee House, that they were in Ghana to make efforts through parliamentary diplomacy to resolve the issues at stake.

“We have appealed to the (Ghanaian) Parliament that if it’s possible at all to look again at the issues, as far as the Ghana Investment Promotion Center Act is concerned, they should please do so.

“If it is not possible, then let us look at ways the pain can be reduced, like those expectations required in the law.

“We’ve proffered a few suggestions one of which is the establishment of Ghana Nigeria Business Council backed by legislation on both sides,” Gbajabiamila said.

Meanwhile, in a communique issued jointly at the end of the bilateral meeting between members of the two Parliaments led by their respective Speakers, Gbajabiamila and Prof. Mike Oquaye, it was resolved that “measures will be adopted to support law-abiding traders to properly regularise their business operations to alleviate the trade challenges occasioned by the alleged closure of the retail stores, in view of the ravaging impact of Covid-19 pandemic on businesses and families in both countries.”

They acknowledged that many stakeholders in the retail sector had limited appreciation of the trade laws of Ghana, in particular, Section 28 of the GIPC Act, which provides for the conditions under which non-Ghanaians can engage in trading activities and urged the relevant regulatory authorities including the GIPC and Trade Attaches of foreign missions to educate their citizens on the trade laws.

They equally emphasized the need to respect the sovereignty of Member States of ECOWAS and their laws but, in doing so, efforts must be made to ensure that the ECOWAS Agenda for free movement of people and goods in furtherance of a shared and prosperous future of citizens of the sub-region is not compromised.

“A meeting will be held between the Trade and Foreign Affairs Committees of both Legislatures to deliberate on applications of Trade Laws, in particular, the GIPC Act, 2013 (Act 865) and make recommendations for appropriate solutions; and

“A Joint Committee will be established composed of Members of both Legislatures to explore the possible passage of reciprocal legislation, which could be potentially called the “Ghana-Nigeria Friendship Act” which shall propose “Ghana-Nigeria Business Council” to provide a framework to sustain the friendship and benefits to citizens of the two nations.”

On departure from Ghana yesterday, Gbajabiamila expressed his gratitude to his counterpart for his statesmanship, leadership and hospitality, which made it possible for both countries to resolve thorny issues through legislative diplomacy.

Theconclaveng

MOSCOW — Russian scientists have belatedly published first results from early trials into the experimental Sputnik V vaccine, which received government approval last month but drew considerable criticism from experts, as the shots had only been tested on several dozen people before being more widely administered.

In a report published in the journal Lancet on Friday, developers of the vaccine said it appeared to be safe and to prompt an antibody response in all 40 people tested in the second phase of the study within three weeks. However, the authors noted that participants were only followed for 42 days, the study sample was small and there was no placebo or control vaccine used.

One part of the safety trial included only men and the study mostly involved people in their 20s and 30s, so it is unclear how the vaccine might work in older populations most at risk of the more severe complications of COVID-19.

International experts remained cautious over the vaccine’s effectiveness and safety. Nevertheless, its Russian developers made some bold claims Friday after presenting the findings to reporters.

Professor Alexander Gintsburg, director of the Moscow-based Gamaleya Institute that developed the vaccine with assistance from Russia’s Defence Ministry, told reporters that the vaccine triggers “sufficient” immune response “to counteract any imaginable dose infecting (a person) with COVID-19.”

“We are ready to assert that the protective effect of this vaccine will be detectable and remain at a proper level for 2 years, or maybe even more,” Gintsburg said, without providing any evidence to back up the claim.

According to the Lancet report, the trials took place in two Russian hospitals involving healthy adults aged 18 to 60, who were required to self-isolate once they registered for the trial. They remained in the hospital for the first 28 days of the study after being vaccinated.

One part of the study involved a frozen formulation of the vaccine while another studied a freeze-dried variation. Scientists said the frozen vaccine would be suitable for current global vaccine supply chains while the freeze-dried version could be used in hard-to-reach areas.

Both vaccines used a modified version of the common cold-causing adenovirus to carry genes for the spike protein in the coronavirus, as a way to prime the body to react if a real virus causing COVID-19 comes along. That’s a similar technology to the vaccines being developed by China’s CanSino Biologics and Britain’s Oxford University and AstraZeneca.

Russian researchers said all 40 participants produced a neutralizing antibody response, molecules which are key to blocking infection. The vaccines also appeared to trigger a reaction in the body’s T-Cells, which help by destroying cells that have been invaded by the virus.

The most commonly reported side effects were pain at the injection site, fever, headache, and muscle or joint pain.

In an accompanying commentary, Dr. Naor Bar-Zeev of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and colleagues wrote that the studies were “encouraging but small.” They said that the immune reaction elicited by the vaccine “bodes well” but that “efficacy for any COVID-19 vaccine has not yet been shown.”

Bar-Zeev and colleagues said that proving the safety of any coronavirus vaccine would be critical.

“Since vaccines are given to healthy people and during the COVID-19 pandemic, potentially to everyone after approval following (advanced) trials, safety is paramount,” the scientists wrote.

Dr. Ohid Yaqub, senior lecturer at the Science Policy Research Unit at the University of Sussex, said the limited study size was not enough for regulatory approval, which the vaccine received last month.

“The design and size of (an early) study is not anywhere near sufficient for widely recognized standards of approval. The study was not randomized, and it was not large enough to detect rarer safety issues,” Yaqub said.

The vaccine was approved by the Russian government with much fanfare on Aug. 11. President Vladimir Putin personally broke the news on national television and said that one of his daughters had already been vaccinated, experienced slight side effects and developed antibodies. Since then, several high-profile officials also said they had taken the shots, including Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin and Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu.

It remains unclear whether they were among the volunteers in clinical trials or accessed the vaccine in some other way.

Russian health authorities announced advanced trials of the vaccine among 40,000 volunteers last month. According to official records, it will be a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Officials also mentioned that vaccination of risk groups, such as doctors and teachers, may be carried out “in parallel” – but it remains unclear whether it will be done as part of the study.

Michael Head, a senior research fellow in global health at Britain’s University of Southampton, agreed the Russian vaccine appeared to be “promising,” but that further studies were needed.

“At this stage, we do not actually know if the vaccine works,” he said. Head was not linked to the Russian research. “Public confidence in any vaccine is vital,” he said in a statement, calling suggestions from Russian and other authorities that a vaccine could be fast-tracked without the proper research “problematic.”

“Ultimately, we must not pour additional fuel on the anti-vaccine lobby fires,” he said.

Numerous public health experts expressed concern last month that Russia had approved the Sputnik V vaccine before publishing any data.

The World Health Organization said last month it had started discussions with Russia to obtain more details about their candidate vaccine. But on Friday, WHO spokeswoman Dr. Margaret Harris said she “had no specific information on Russia … and who is sharing what (data) with who.” She said the agency’s aim was “to get all countries together and get all the information.”

Cheng reported from London. Jamey Keaten in Geneva contributed to this report.

Culled from https://www.ctvnews.ca/