Deputy Minority Leader Patricia Appiagyei has rejected GH¢70,000 sent to her by the Majority Chief Whip, saying she does not want to personally benefit from a parliamentary process involving Supreme Court nominees that her Caucus had refused to participate in.The Asokwa MP said she was also uncomfortable accepting the money because she had not been informed about its source.In a memorandum dated September 2, to Minority Chief Whip Frank Annoh-Dompreh, with Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin copied, she said her decision was based on principle and directed that the money be returned to the Majority Chief Whip.“It is with regret that I return the amount of seventy thousand cedis (GH¢70,000.00) allocated to me as an advance of money from the Majority Chief Whip of Parliament of Ghana. I am returning the money on the basis of the fact that, primarily, I do not know the source of the money being given to me,” she stated.Mrs Appiagyei said she was particularly unwilling to receive any financial benefit from the vetting of members of the governing side’s leadership, including Mahama Ayariga and Zanetor Agyemang Rawlings.She also cited the Minority’s boycott of the vetting of three Supreme Court nominees – Justice Sophia Rosetta Oduokuwa Bernasko Essah, Justice Edward Amoako Asante and Justice Anthony Forson Jnr – arguing that accepting the money would be inconsistent with the Caucus’ position.“It is also not my intention to extort any money from any of the above judges,” she added, while reaffirming her support for the Minority Caucus’ position and noting that her decision was also in line with Mr Afenyo-Markin’s decision to return his share.It is recalled that members of the Minority Caucus in Parliament walked out of proceedings during the vetting of three Supreme Court judge nominees on August 27, citing what they described as an irregular procedure adopted by the Appointments Committee leadership.Before leaving the session, the Minority Leader, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, stated the Caucus’ objection to the procedure adopted by the Committee’s leadership.“The procedure that has been adopted is at variance with the orders of the House. How can you ask us to vet Supreme Court judges with three days’ notice?” he queried.His objection was preceded by an extensive debate with the Chairman of the Committee, Bernard Ahiafor. Mr Afenyo-Markin insisted that the established procedure required sufficient notice before nominees were vetted.“The standard practice is to give fourteen days’ notice, advertise in the newspapers before the vetting is done,” he stressed.He subsequently read concerns raised by then Minority Leader Dr Cassiel Ato Forson during a similar situation involving the vetting of Supreme Court nominees after short notice had been given.Addressing the nominees before walking out, Mr Afenyo-Markin clarified that the Minority’s objection was not to their nominations but to the process the Committee adopted.“To the nominees, we are not against your nomination; we are against the procedure, and we cannot be part of this,” he stated before leaving the session, followed by other Minority members of the Committee.