Drama in Parliament: Speaker declares 4 seats vacant - 2 NPP, 1 Independent, 1 NDC

The Speaker of Parliament, Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin, yesterday declared four parliamentary seats vacant on the premise that the current occupants have defected by filing to contest the next elections on tickets different from what they represent in the current Parliament. 

The ruling effectively ended the tenure of Agona West Member of Parliament (MP), Cynthia Morrison of the New Patriotic Party (NPP); Amenfi Central MP, Peter Yaw Kwakye-Ackah of the National Democratic Congress (NDC); Suhum MP, Kwadwo Asante of the NPP, and Fomena MP, Andrew Asiamah Amoako, an independent MP.

Ms Morrison, Mr Asante and Mr Kwakye-Ackah have all filed as independent candidates for the December 7 elections, while Mr Asiamah Amoako, who was the Second Deputy Speaker of Parliament until Mr Bagbin’s ruling, filed to contest the Fomena seat on the ticket of the governing NPP.

The about 12-minute ruling, read to one of the quietest halls in Ghana’s legislature, was followed by near chaos as the NPP members stood up and converged on the back of their side before the Speaker urged the marshals to walk them out.

Context

The issue had been triggered by former Minority Leader and MP for Tamale South, Haruna Iddrisu, who petitioned the Speaker to remove the four from the legislature for holding allegiance to entities different from what they represented in the current Parliament.

Mr Iddrisu had tabled the petition on the strength of portions of Article 97 of the Constitution, arguing that those provisions of the Constitution abhorred the switch in allegiance midway through a parliamentarian’s tenure.

Indeed, Article 97(g) states that a Member of Parliament shall vacate his seat in Parliament “if he leaves the party of which he was a member at the time of his election to Parliament to join another party or seeks to remain in Parliament as an independent member”, while Article 97(h) states that the member would forfeit his seat “if he was elected a Member of Parliament as an independent candidate and joins a political party”.

The Speaker agreed, stating in his ruling that the relevant MPs had, by their actions, vacated their seats in Parliament.

Role of Speaker

Mr Bagbin said the Speaker was called upon by the Standing Orders of Parliament, particularly Order 18, to inform the House of the occurrence of a vacancy of the seat of a member under Clause (1) (b) to (e), (g) and (h) of Article 97 of the Constitution.

“Accordingly, I proceed to inform the House that by the notification of the polls the following Members of Parliament have by their actions vacated their seats in Parliament,” he stated. 

Basis of ruling

Providing his understanding of Article 97 of the Constitution, Speaker Bagbin said at the core of the Minority side’s statement were the provisions of Article 97(1) of the Constitution of Ghana, 1992, which governed the circumstances under which a Member of Parliament shall vacate his/her seat in Parliament.

The Speaker stated that Article 97(1)(g) and (h) operated to prevent what the old school referred to as “cross carpeting” or “carpet crossing” as witnessed in the early Legislative Councils and Parliaments of the Gold Coast and the Republic of Ghana respectively.

Cross-carpeting was now part of “defection” or “party switching”, when an MP who was elected on the ticket of one political party leaves that party to join another, or when an independent MP joins a political party after being elected as an independent member or a party member acts similarly.

To his mind, the concept of defection raised significant concerns about the integrity of political representation.

“When voters elect a candidate, they do so based not only on the individual’s personal qualities but also on the political party platform they represent.

Party-switching or defection, therefore, can be seen as a breach of the mandate and social contract between the MP and the electorate, as it changes the political dynamics that the voters originally endorsed,” Mr Bagbin said.

He added that the prohibition of defection, as reflected in Article 97(1)(g) and (h), served several critical purposes in maintaining the integrity of Parliament, parliamentarians, and protecting the trust and will of the people.

Mr Bagbin also indicated that those provisions were designed to safeguard the principles of party loyalty, voter representation, and political stability.

“Defection is prohibited because it undermines the trust placed in MPs by their constituents and can lead to instability in Parliament.

These constitutional safeguards ensure that Members of Parliament remain accountable to both their parties and the electorate, and they prevent MPs from engaging in behaviour that could amount to fraud or disruptive of the functioning of Parliament,” Speaker Bagbin ruled.

The Speaker disagreed with suggestions that those provisions which addressed the vacation of an MP’s seat due to defection should apply only to future parliaments and not to the term of office of Parliament, dismissing it both as untenable and inconsistent with the constitutional purpose of those provisions.

Mr Bagbin said to the extent that those provisions were designed to prevent political instability, opportunistic behaviour, fraudulent representations and disruption of parliamentary composition during the term of a Parliament, to understand those provisions as only applying prospectively would nullify the purpose of Article 97 and render them effectively superfluous.

“By the time the next Parliament is constituted, any MP who has defected or switched political allegiance during the current Parliament would no longer be in violation of the provision — they would start the next term aligned with their new party or as an independent,” Mr Bagbin explained.

The Speaker pointed out that in the present matter before the House, the notice of poll was available at the Electoral Commission on all the 275 Constituencies of which he had duly taken note. 

NPP’s argument

The Majority Leader, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, after the ruling and a banter with the Speaker on the floor of the House, led his side out of the House.

Speaking briefly to the press, he said his side was immediately boycotting Parliament until the matter was settled.

He said the writ he filed at the Supreme Court seeking interpretation of the matter was pending, and thought that the Speaker would wait upon the apex court to interprete the Constitution, adding that “the issues we have raised are issues of interpretation”.

“The Speaker had no business doing this. He did this just to give advantage to the NDC,” Mr Afenyo-Markin stated.

The Majority Leader said his side was waiting on the Supreme Court to make a pronouncement, which they would respect. 

NDC’s position

The Minority Leader, Dr Cassiel Ato Forson, said indeed, a group of Ghanaians voted for the NDC to be the majority but for the machinations of the NPP, adding that “finally, we are here to do the business for Ghanaians”.

Dr Forson added that often, Ghanaians had blamed Parliament for the poor showing of the economy, but added that “obviously, the NDC cannot be blamed”.

He assured Ghanaians that the new Majority would work hard and with all seriousness.

Dr Forson disclosed that the new Majority side would elect a new Second Deputy Speaker on Tuesday and also take over the leadership of committees of the House.

“A lot has gone on for too long, but finally the dust has settled and we are here,” the Minority Leader said.

Opinions

Following the ruling, governance expert, Dr John Osae-Kwapong, said listening to the Speaker’s detailed analysis and basis for his ruling, “I now fully understand the political mischief which the Constitution seeks to cure”.

“The constitutional provisions will have no material effect if they were designed to cure future and not present political mischief,” he said.

Dr Osae-Kwapong, who is the Project Director of Democracy Project, added that the ruling could evoke interesting days in Ghanaian politics, particularly in Parliament.

“The question is what next? Does this change the composition of Parliament immediately, or will this be subjected to judicial review? Interesting days ahead,” he said.

The President of Imani Africa, Franklin Cudjoe, described the ruling as unprecedented.

“It presupposes that the four MPs have left the people they represented in Parliament. I cannot fault the Speaker,” he said.

“The major problem shows the level of party indiscipline which the leadership of those parties have failed to address.

“Simply put, the leadership must address the canker of indiscipline in the parties,” he added.

Mr Cudjoe said although he was not a lawyer, he saw nothing wrong with the Speaker’s ruling.

He said it was good that the Majority Leader had taken the issue to the Supreme Court for interpretation, and that it would test the constitutional provisions.