Speaker Alban Bagbin, Prof Stephen Kwaku Asare and Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo
The seeming feud between Ghana’s legislative arm of government and judiciary continues as the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, has taken legal action against the Supreme Court, challenging the court's decision to set aside his declaration of four seats in the House vacant.
Bagbin’s lawyer has asked the Supreme Court to set aside “the processes and proceedings in the Supreme Court” that led to the directive of the 5-member panel of the court, chaired by Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, for him to stay his declaration of the seats vacant.
The lawyers also asked for the “vacating of the order of the Court dated October 18, 2024.”
US-based Ghanaian lawyer and scholar, Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare, widely known as Kwaku Azar, has broken down the suit filed against the Supreme Court by the Speaker of Parliament.
In a post shared on Facebook on October 29, 2024, Kwaku Azar wrote: “The Speaker’s lawyers have asked the Court to do two things in response to its October 18 ruling: 1. Cancel all court processes and proceedings in this case. 2. Undo the Court’s order.”
He went on to give reasons for the application filed by Bagbin.
He explained that the Speaker of Parliament is essentially telling the Supreme Court that its five-member panel led by the Chief Justice had no business hearing the case brought before them by the leader of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) caucus in Parliament, Alexander Kwamina Afenyo-Markin.
Azar also said that Bagbin is arguing that the application filed by Afenyo-Markin against his declaration was full of misleading statements.
He added that the Speaker finds the order of the court an interference in the workings of Parliament.
“Here’s why they’re asking for this:
1. The plaintiff’s initial request to the Court was invalid.
2. The Court does not have the power to hear this case.
3. The Court has no power to interfere with a decision made by the Speaker of Parliament.
4. The plaintiff handled the case in a way that violated the principles of fairness (natural justice).
5. The Court’s orders were made in a way that violated the principle of fairness (natural justice).
6. The Court did not follow its rules and procedures required for making its decision.
7. The Court failed to exercise its discretion in the proper manner, as described in Article 296 of the Constitution.
8. The Court’s orders were based on false information provided by the plaintiff.
"In short, the Speaker’s lawyers believe the case was mishandled on multiple levels and that the Court didn’t have the authority to make the ruling in the first place. They want the entire process and the Court’s orders to be reversed,” Azar wrote.
The academic also asked the apex court to broadcast the proceedings on the matter because of the public interest it has gained.
“The Speaker has filed a process in Court in the matter of the 4 vacated seats. GOGO urges the Court to televise all further proceedings in this cause. As always, GOGO will bring to the public the gist of the parties’ application without commentary, allowing Ghanafuo to form their own views."
Referring to another part of the Speaker's application, the legal luminary said that Bagbin, through his lawyers, is arguing that the order of the court to him cannot hold because it would be a violation of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana.
The part of the application he referred to reads as follows:
“Additionally, the first Defendant also expects the Court to set aside the processes and proceedings which led to the said orders, so as to avoid being seen as seeking to overthrow the 1992 Constitution and/or as merely subjecting itself to the advancement of a partisan political agenda on behalf of the representative of a political party; more so when the writ and processes before the Court had not properly invoked the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.”
Kwaku Azar further explained that;
"In layman’s words, the Speaker, through his lawyers, is concerned that if the Court doesn’t set aside its orders, it could look like the Court is:
1. Seeking to overthrow the Constitution, which is the foundation of the country’s legal system. That is, the Court is doing the “C” word.
2. Advancing a political agenda, meaning the Court could appear to be siding with a political party, instead of staying neutral.
In effect, the Speaker, through his lawyers, is asserting that by not abandoning its October 18 orders, the Court could be seen as engaging in a 'C' word and/or as being influenced by political interests."
Background:
The Supreme Court of Ghana on October 18, 2024, stayed the ruling of Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin in the matter of the vacation of four seats.
This occurred as the highest court in the land, led by Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, considered an application from the New Patriotic Party (NPP) Members of Parliament.
The decision by the apex court effectively suspends the implementation of the Speaker’s ruling on October 17, 2024, pending further legal review and final determination.
Bagbin had granted a motion by Minority Leader Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson to declare four seats vacant, making the NDC the party with the majority members in Parliament.
Delivering his ruling, the Speaker noted that the decision by the affected MPs to contest in the December 7, 2024, election as independents or on the ticket of a party different from the one on whose ticket they currently serve contravened Article 97 (g) and (h) of the 1992 Constitution.
He noted that the motive and operational effect of Article 97 (g) and (h) was to address the issues of cross-carpeting and defection as witnessed in parliaments of old.
He stated that the intent of Article 97 (g) (i) was to ensure party loyalty throughout an MP's tenure in ParliamentHe emphasised that the affected MPs, by their decision and the Notice of Polls issued by the Electoral Commission for the December 7, 2024, parliamentary elections, have vacated their seats.
The affected seats and their MPs included Cynthia Morrison (Agona West), Kwadjo Asante (Suhum), Andrew Amoako Asiamah (Fomena), and Peter Kwakye Ackah (Amenfi Central).
The National Democratic Congress (NDC) is upholding the Speaker's ruling, while the NPP is supporting the Supreme Court's decision.
View Kwaku Azar's posts below:
Credit:
