The committee’s purpose is to investigate allegations of corruption and the looting of state resources by former government officials.

Speaking in an interview on TV3’s KeyPoints, Dafeamekpor argued that the ORAL committee is fully backed by law, despite criticisms from some quarters, including from former Majority Leader Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu. According to Dafeamekpor, the critics misinterpreted the legal basis for the committee’s existence.

“I think he got his analysis wrong because the activities of ORAL, the committee that has been set up to do evidence gathering for purposes of some further action by the government, is probably anchored in law,” Dafeamekpor asserted, referring to those who have raised objections to the committee’s operations.

The South Dayi MP pointed specifically to Article 41(f) of Ghana’s Constitution, which states: “The exercise and enjoyment of rights and freedoms is inseparable from the performance of duties and obligations, and accordingly, it shall be the duty of every citizen to protect and preserve public property and expose and combat misuse and waste of public funds and property.” Dafeamekpor believes this constitutional provision provides a solid legal foundation for the formation of the ORAL committee.

His comments were a direct response to Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu’s criticism, in which the former Majority Leader questioned the committee’s legal authority and methods. Dafeamekpor dismissed these concerns, asserting that the criticisms reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of legal reasoning. “I think those including my roommates who are making these complaints fell into an error of legal reasoning,” he said, defending the committee’s actions.

The lawmaker went further, accusing opposition members of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) of failing to offer constructive suggestions and instead resorting to discrediting the government’s initiatives. “If a government is rolling out its project and you cannot suggest constructively, don’t question its legality because it is neither here nor there,” Dafeamekpor said. He characterized some of the criticisms as “ignominious,” suggesting that the opposition’s approach was becoming increasingly embarrassing and losing credibility.

In the context of the political climate surrounding the ORAL committee, Dafeamekpor’s defense underscores the ongoing debate over accountability and transparency in Ghana’s governance, with some defending the committee’s legal standing while others remain critical of its scope and operations.