5 MPs shot down over Atuabo Port
The High Court in Sekondi yesterday dismissed an application by five Members of Parliament (MPs), which sought a judicial review of a law that restricts further expansion of oil and gas facilities at the Takoradi Port.
Advertisement
According to the court, Parliament is an independent arm of government and any decision to quash what has been approved by the legislative body with the right procedures as per the standing orders cannot be overturned by a court.
In July, Parliament approved an agreement between the government of Ghana and a British company, Lonrho Ports, for the development of an oil and gas free port at Atuabo.
Clause 7 of the agreement bars Takoradi Port from further expanding its facilities for oil and gas until Lonrho builds its freeport, recovers all its costs, and makes enough profit.
In filing their application, however, the MPs – Mr Kwaku Kwarteng, Obuasi West; Mr Kwabena Okyere Darko, Takoradi; Mr Joseph Cudjoe, Effia; Mr Kofi Brako, Tema Central, and Mavis Hawa Koomson, Ewutu Senya, argued that the clause was illegal.
Ruling
In its ruling, the court, presided over by Mr Justice Peter Kwabena Ababio, reminded the applicants that the country’s democratic process had in place separation of powers among the Executive, Legislature and the Judiciary and each one of those arms of government had to be seen to be supervising the other.
It said Parliament in approving the agreement did not violate any constitutional provision as it went through the process according to the Standing Orders of the House.
The court was of the contention that since the House did not breach any constitutional provision, the court could not interfere with what Parliament as an independent body had approved by majority decision.
Other Trending Stories
It further argued that ruling in favour of the applicants would mean opening the floodgate for anybody to go to court and challenge every decision by Parliament, which had been constitutionally empowered to perform its functions.
According to the court, it could only intervene and grant the wish of the applicants, if Parliament had failed to follow the procedures or set aside its own standing orders.
The judge, however, commended the applicants, saying that although the ruling did not go in their favour, they acted and followed the process in arriving at the ruling.
A nominal cost of GH¢1,000.00 was awarded against the applicants.
Intent of appeal
Counsel for petitioners, Alexander Abban, disagreed with the court's position and said they intended to appeal against it.
“We have the right of appeal; we will exercise that right fully,” he remarked after the ruling.