A legal practitioner Godwin Adagwine says the 80 members of parliament who are pushing for a parliamentary inquiry into the sale of Merchant bank to equity fund FORTIZ, stand a better chance of having the deal abrogated if they can prove that the Social Security and National Insurance Trust violated laws in the controversial transaction.

He said the value for money argument, which is one of the basis on which Parliament is seeking to investigate the transaction, is not sustainable.

He was speaking to Joy News on Parliament's decision to probe the Merchant Bank Fortiz sale transaction.

The probe was necessitated by  a motion signed by 80 members of Parliament which then forced the Speaker to call for an emergency sitting on Monday.

Deputy Minority Leader, Dominic Nitiwul who is spearheading the motion, told Joy News the MPs would investigate allegations of conflict of interest against President John Mahama’s brother Ibrahim Mahama and his lawyer Tony Lithur.

They would also consider if there was value for  money in the controversial transaction.

But Adagwine said Parliament must be careful not to go beyond its statutory powers.

He said instead of probing into the value of money aspect of the transaction, the MPs must rather turn their attention to laws governing SSNIT and find out if any law was sidestepped prior to the agreement being signed.

He explained it will be difficult to make a case on the value for money because SSNIT as a trustee takes decision on behalf of its contributors.

"Don't forget the shares belong to SSNIT and SSNIT is managing those shares on behalf of pensioners. As a manager, SSNIT has the power to determine what in its honest view is value for money having regard to the circumstances in which the transaction is undertaken.

"So if someone, not being SSNIT stands outside and says the matter could have been better dealt with in this other manner that maybe so. But I don't see how, legally speaking that can be basis to set aside a decision that SSNIT has taken within its statutory mandate.

"Value for money is a vague concept," he stressed.

He said the only basis under which the transaction will be abrogated by Parliament is only when it can be proven that transaction has violated the constitution.

He said the issues of conflict of interest against the president, his brother and lawyer Tony Lithur may have constitutional implications bothering on abuse of power or office, matters which can be addressed by the court.