Parliament: Take Supreme Court rulings as bitter pill – Afenyoh Markin
Hon. Afenyoh Markin made this charge at a press Conference in Parliament last Thursday to brief journalists on the fallout from the Supreme Court ruling the previous day.
Deputy majority leader, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, has charged the Minority Group in parliament to take the recent ruling of the Supreme Court as a bitter pill and stop running to them. This is because it is not all rulings from the Supreme Court that will favour them.
Hon. Afenyoh Markin made this charge at a press Conference in Parliament last Thursday to brief journalists on the fallout from the Supreme Court ruling the previous day.
The ruling maintained that Deputy Speakers who mounted the chair of the speaker could vote when it comes to voting. This is because, they are representatives of their constituents and that denying them the right to vote in such matters deprived their constituents of their rights of representation.
According to Hon. Afenyoh, in 2015, the same Supreme Court gave a landmark ruling in the case “Kwadwo Gah Vrs Kofi Adrah” that went in favour of the NDC and this thy appreciated. However, in the recent one on the voting right of a presiding speaker, which has not gone down well with them, they are crying foul.
He indicated that by this, the NDC was trying to destroy the institution of democracy and also trying to destroy the bridge leading to it. By so doing, they will one day come to the bridge leading democracy and they cannot cross it because they have destroyed it. Hon. Afenyoh further charged the NDC to accept Supreme Court decisions be they favorable or unfavorable and stop arguing forcefully and noisely on such rulings.
Deputy Speakers Act on Speaker’s Behalf
Lending credence to his deputy’s position, Osei Kyei – Mensah Bonsu indicated that the issues had been notably dealt with by Hon. Afenyoh. According to him a Deputy Speaker, who is a Member of Parliament has the right to vote, as contained in the Supreme Court ruling.
The Majority Leader maintained that by this ruling, the Supreme Court, had, in concert with the 1992 Constitution brought to the fore that all rules in contrast with the Constitution are null and void.
He argued that by Article 71 and 97 of the Constitution, the definite article “The” is used, and that is meant for the substantive Speaker.
He indicated further that by the Constitution, Ghana’s Speaker is not supposed to be Member of Parliament. It was against this background that when Hon. Doe Adjaho was made Speaker in the 7th Republic can Parliament, he resigned.
The long – serving MP for Suame argued that if NDC was not happy with it they could go for a review.
By S.O. Ankamah
