This week, there have really been just two stories. First, the President granted a recession to the prison sentence of the Montie 3. They had all pleaded liable to charges of criminal contempt and been sentenced to four months in prison. They then petitioned the President for a pardon.

He passed on their petition to the Council of State for advice. They advised him. He then granted them a recession. This means their prison term was reduced from four months to time served, which comes to about one month. They will still have criminal records, and of course, they've each already paid GHC10,000 fines.

Now, before the President made his decision to grant this recession to the three NDC activists, everyone and their mothers had expressed opinions on whether or not he should. Those who thought he should (which was basically a bunch of ministers and NDC supporters) all felt it was important for the President to exercise his Article 72 powers and grant them clemency to balance what they considered an unfair application of the Supreme Court's powers. They considered the sentences too harsh, and an attack on free speech. Those who thought he shouldn't grant the pardon (which included his own lawyer, Tony Lithur), believe that it was a discretionary power that the President was being asked to apply, and he would therefore be unable to do so without demonstrating a bias. After all, the three men in question were all self acclaimed NDC and Mahama supporters.

So President Mahama pardoned the Montie 3 (well, he regressed their sentences  - same difference really, if their desire in petitioning him was to get out of prison…), and the whole country had something to say about it. Many expressed shock at the decision, others celebrated the President's boldness. But seriously, why was anyone surprised? Did anyone seriously expect the President to refuse the petition? What would he have gained by refusing to exercise his power of clemency? Would the opposition have suddenly changed their colours and voted for him? In any case, was it illegal for him to grant them mercy? Of course not.

This wasn't the first time this President had used these powers. Just earlier this year, the President pardoned a whole bunch of people, some of them relatively hardened criminals. Nobody criticised his decision then. So it's safe to say that the sole reason for this criticism must be the fact that the Montie 3 are the President's supporters. Well, I confess, if he had asked me, I personally would have advised the President to avoid the appearance of bias by refusing the petition, but, now that he's actually gone and done it, I find myself asking why we think it matters that they were his supporters. It's an executive power, and he used it to spring his guys from jail. You and I may not like it, but the law allows him to do it.

And he's not the first ever President to use those powers either. At the end of his second term, Bill Clinton pardoned several of his party cronies who had been incarcerated for tax evasion. George Bush Jnr was actually quite annoyed about it. Until his own second term came to an end and he went on a pardoning spree of his own - setting free more friends and family than Clinton ever did. The principle is the same: it's a way for the President to help out his buddies, and it's legal. So why are we surprised that he did? And what is all this the NPP's Mr Atta Akyea is saying about "constitutional  lawlessness"? Ther thing is constitutional, but it's also lawless? Isn't that logical madness?

This week's other story, of course, was the case of the Brutalising Bishop. Angel Bishop Obinim caned two members of his church right in front of the congregation. Their crime? Well, they had sex. Then they had the impudence to get pregnant, followed by the audacity to abort it. Now, you may be outraged and be asking yourself, "how dare he", but just wait a minute. They were his adopted children. Yes, and this is Ghana. We torture our children here. It's normal. In fact, it's in the bible. Along with slavery, rape, mutilation and murder. So of course, God says it's ok to publicly humiliate and torture people in church - as long as we are the ones who pay their school fees. I believe the correct technical term here according to the laws of Atta-Akyea-nomics is "Charitable Wickedness".

So anyway, the Gender, children and Social Protection ministry lodged a complaint, and Obinim got arrested. That was when things started to get weird. Some fraud charge popped up out of nowhere. A man claimed that he had given over GHC700,000 to some Okomfuor guy and the guy wasn't returning the money, so he then went to see Obinim to sort things out. Obinim took over 11 MILLION GHANA CEDIS from him to sort out a GHC700,000 problem. Yep you guessed it Rational Senselessness.

The police are apparently investigating this, and kept the child-beating church leader in custody for over 24 hours. His congregation were not happy about it, so like the excellent followers that they are, they thronged to the regional police headquarters here in Accra, demanding his release. They made threats to show they were serious. They started with "No Obinim, No Vote". Then someone must have explained to them that the police were not running for election in 2016, So they changed it to "Release him or we will return to prostitution". I think they are currently considering the Police's counter-offer offer which is, "return to prostitution and you can join your angelic animagus of a religious leader in his cell". I feel another technical term coming along… Educational Illiteracy.

So anyway, those have been the two big ones this week. But the week is not over yet. We've got a stonking Friday morning show to crown it off. Featuring an Election HQ conversation about campaign promises and a continuation of our Education Solutions conversation, where we ask the simple question: are parents making their children less smart? To miss a moment of it would be a Fortunate Misfortune.

My name is Kojo Yankson, and it's been a week of Constitutional Lawlessness and Charitable Wickedness.

GOOD MORNING, GHANAFO!