Reverse Decision On Vacant Seats- Speaker To SC

The Speaker of Parliament, Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin, has filed an application asking the Supreme Court to reverse its decision that halted his declaration of four seats vacant in Parliament.

The application filed by his lawyer, Thaddeus Sory, argues that the Supreme Court misapplied the law when it stayed the execution of the Speaker’s decision, which was not a judicial decision.

It contends that the Supreme Court has powers to stay the rulings of courts but not those of non-judicial bodies such as Parliament.

The Speaker is also asking the Supreme Court to dismiss a writ filed by the Majority Leader, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, which is seeking to stop him from taking any decision regarding the four seats.

He contends that Article 97(1) (g) and (h) which formed the basis for his ruling is clear, precise and unambiguous, hence did not require any constitutional interpretation from the court.

 

Vacant Seats

The Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, on Thursday, October 17, 2024, declared the seats of four Members of Parliament (MPs) vacant following a motion filed by former Minority Leader, Haruna Iddrisu, on ground that they were no longer members of the political parties on which ticket they were elected.

The affected MPs include Peter Yaw Kwakye-Ackah (Amenfi Central), Andrew Asiamah Amoako (Fomena), Kwadjo Asante (Suhum), and Cynthia Mamle Morrison (Agona West).

 

Suit

Prior to his ruling, Afenyo-Markin had filed a suit at the Supreme Court seeking an interpretation of Article 97 (g) and (h) of the 1992 Constitution.

He was seeking a declaration that the MPs filing their nomination to contest either on the ticket of another political party or as independent candidates does not result in a declaration of their seats vacant.

He was also seeking an order restraining the Speaker from pronouncing on any motion regarding the seats of the MPs until the final determination of the case.

In spite of the pendency of the suit, the Speaker went ahead to declare the four seats vacant, resulting in the Supreme Court issuing a restraining order against the execution of the Speaker’s ruling.

Mr. Bagbin, on October 22, 2024, adjourned Parliament indefinitely without making any reference to the decision of the Supreme Court.

 

AG’s Take

The Attorney General and Minister for Justice, Godfred Yeboah Dame, in his response to the suit, asserted that a Member of Parliament filing nomination to contest an upcoming election for a place in a future Parliament does not lead to a vacation of seat.

According to him, the filing of nomination by a sitting MP to contest a future parliamentary election on the ticket of a political party, when he had been elected for the life of the current Parliament as an independent candidate does not result in vacation of his or her seat.

 

Speaker’s Review

Mr. Bagbin has filed an application asking the Supreme Court to review and reverse its decision against his stand on the matter.

The application contends that the Supreme Court has power to halt its own rulings and those of lower courts “but do not extend to a ruling of the Speaker of Parliament who is not part of the judicial hierarchy.”

“With regard to the first Defendant’s (Speaker’s) rulings in Parliament, a separate arm of Government, therefore, such rulings ARE NOT rulings within the judicial hierarchy so as to be the subject matter of ‘an application for stay of execution’ and a judicial order staying their execution,” the application added.

The Speaker further contends that the Supreme Court breached the rule of natural justice by halting his ruling through an ex-parte motion, and as a result denied him an opportunity to be heard.

It is his case that the court could only entertain ex-parte applications under exceptional circumstances, which did not apply in the instant case.

 

Source:dailyguidenetwork.com