A Ghanaian citizen, Dr. Yaw Twerefour, has filed a suit at the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the long-standing practice of allocating and disbursing portions of the District Assemblies Common Fund (DACF) directly to Members of Parliament.
The suit, which raises significant questions about public financial management and constitutional governance, seeks to halt the payment of DACF monies into the personal bank accounts of MPs and to compel a review of the arrangement under which MPs receive allocations for constituency-related projects.
Through his lawyer, Diana Asonaba Dapaah of Sam Okudzeto & Associates, Dr. Twerefour has also filed a motion for an interlocutory injunction seeking to restrain the Administrator of the DACF and the Minister for Finance from approving or effecting any further payments to MPs pending the final determination of the case.
The Attorney-General, the Administrator of the DACF, the Minister for Local Government, Decentralisation and Rural Development, and the Minister for Finance have been named as defendants.
In court documents, Dr. Twerefour argues that while the DACF is constitutionally established to support district assemblies, portions of the fund are allocated to Members of Parliament under headings such as “Constituency Labour Projects” and “Constituency Monitoring and Evaluation.”
He contends that information obtained through a Right to Information (RTI) request confirms that DACF monies are specifically earmarked for MPs and paid directly into their personal bank accounts.
According to him, the practice undermines transparency and accountability in the management of public funds.
“DACF monies are paid directly into the personal bank accounts of Members of Parliament and these monies are substantial sums disbursed with no adequate documentation or accountability provided for the utilisation of the said funds,” he argued in an affidavit supporting the injunction application.
Dr. Twerefour further maintained that once public funds are transferred into personal accounts, they become difficult to monitor, trace or recover, thereby exposing state resources to possible misuse and financial loss.
He described the matter as one of significant public interest, arguing that the court’s intervention is necessary to prevent the continued dissipation of public funds and to preserve the integrity of constitutional governance.
The injunction application, scheduled to be heard on June 23, 2026, seeks an order restraining the DACF Administrator and the Finance Minister from approving, authorising or disbursing any DACF allocations to MPs under the various constituency funding arrangements pending the outcome of the substantive suit.
In the substantive action, Dr. Twerefour is seeking several declarations, including a ruling that the DACF is exclusively intended for the benefit and administration of district assemblies and cannot lawfully be allocated to Members of Parliament.
He is also asking the court to declare unconstitutional any formula that earmarks portions of the fund for MPs, as well as the practice of transferring DACF monies into personal bank accounts.
Additionally, he argues that the arrangement undermines the constitutional decentralisation framework, weakens the Auditor-General’s oversight mandate, and creates a system susceptible to misapplication, diversion and lack of traceability.
Among the reliefs sought are a perpetual injunction against future DACF allocations to MPs outside district assemblies, an order directing all future DACF disbursements to be paid strictly into designated public accounts of district assemblies, and a directive for the Auditor-General to conduct a comprehensive audit of all DACF monies previously disbursed to Members of Parliament.
Dr. Twerefour is also seeking an order for the recovery of any funds found to have been unlawfully disbursed, arguing that such measures are necessary to restore constitutional compliance, strengthen accountability, and safeguard public resources.
