Sampson Anyenini writes: Pray – When is the High Court the Forum to Declare a Seat Vacant?

I am thinking a cause of action, as we say in law, must first accrue to trigger recourse to the High Court. In article 33, your human rights must have been violated or there is threatened violation before you can approach the High Court to assert same. The now popular article 99 directs the High Court to be the determiner of any “question” (i.e. dispute) over vacancy of a seat in Parliament. The question (dispute) must first arise by an action in article 97 before the High Court is called upon for a resolution in article 99, right?

If 97 is subject to 99 there may be a problem. I am just trying to figure out how that may mean an MP’s seat will remain despite the occurrence of the incidence in 97. The incidences in 97 include automatic seat vacancy upon dissolution of Parliament, expulsion for contempt of Parliament or resignation by an MP, an MP being elected as the Speaker, decision stemming from an MP being absent 15 sittings without permission, an MP leaving his party.

Parliament’s Standing Orders then supply procedure supervised the Speaker in all instances, right? It is not conceivable that EC will conduct a by-election unless it is INFORMED by the Clerk that an MP has died at least 3 months to general elections, right?

So, might an interpretation that sustains the internal logic and integrity of the Constitution not rather be that 97 stands separate and 99 is sort of a NEXT STEP to be triggered in the High Court to determine a DISPUTE arising from an ANNOUNCEMENT of vacancy (COMPLETED or ONGOING enforcement of 97)?

I am just thinking if it could be the case that a projection of 99 as the provision and sort of the procedure to INITIATE or COMMENCE a 97 incident to VALIDATE such a vacancy may not be how to look at it.

I suppose the claim that the Speaker took over the INTERPRETIVE job of the Supreme Court is settled as misleading. Read Dr. Christopher Nyinevi in first comment, and listen to Dr. Maame A.S. Mensa-Bonsu below.

In the meantime, the same ex parte process is available to seek to set aside the SC ruling, and also seek to stay execution of same.

Questions according to my level of appreciation.