The vetting of Chief Justice nominee Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie descended into heated partisan exchanges on Monday, culminating in a full walkout by the Minority members on the Appointments Committee.
The Minority, led by Alexander Afenyo-Markin, announced its decision to boycott the process, insisting that the nomination itself is illegitimate because of unresolved legal challenges relating to the removal of former Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo.
“We are registering that we reject the nomination, and the record should reflect that the report of the vetting be a Majority report,” Mr. Afenyo-Markin declared before exiting the chamber.
According to the Minority, multiple cases currently before the Supreme Court, High Court, and ECOWAS Court make it improper for Parliament to proceed with the consideration of a new Chief Justice. They argue that continuing the process undermines judicial independence and prejudges matters that are still under adjudication.
But the walkout was preceded by a tense confrontation between the two leaders in Parliament.
- Read also:
- Clash in Parliament: Use of 'disputed nominee' sparks heated debate over Chief Justice nominee vetting
- Afenyo-Markin, Ayariga lock horns over procedure at Justice Baffoe-Bonnie's vetting as Chief Justice nominee
- Justice Baffoe-Bonnie on why he left Prisons Service for the love of his wife
- Justice Baffoe-Bonnie proposes holding presidential election in November to allow Supreme Court settle disputes before January 7 inauguration
Graphic Online's Justice Agbenorsi & Dickson Worlanyo Dotse reports from Parliament House that in a tense session on Monday, the Minority and Majority Leaders clashed over the terminology used to describe Chief Justice nominee, Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, igniting a fierce debate when he appeared before the Appointments Committee of Parliament for his vetting.
The use of the word “disputed nominee” by the Minority Leader to describe the Chief Justice nominee caused a clash between the Minority and the Majority side.
When he was given the opportunity to make a preliminary comment, the Minority Leader, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, described the acting Chief Justice as a “disputed nominee”, a term which the Majority Leader, Mahama Ayariga, objected to.
The Majority Leader’s argument was per Standing Orders 122 and 123, which guide the grounds on which debates can be interrupted and the content of speeches.
According to him, the first provision barred the Minority Leader from raising any new issues, especially when the Speaker had ruled on a motion filed by the Minority seeking to stay the vetting.
The second provision stipulates that the conduct of the Speaker, the Chief Justice, members, and the Superior Court of Judicature shall not be raised in Parliament except by a subordinate motion.
“He has no lawful authority to raise anything about what happened in court and on the floor of parliament,” the Majority Leader said.
In his response, the Minority Leader accused the Majority Leader of acting in bad faith, further accusing him of trying to use his numbers to intimidate the Minority.
He added that the rule relied on by the Majority Leader had to do with debates on the floor of the house.
Mr Afenyo-Markin further stated that the issue raised in his preliminary comment was a political issue, and as such, the Minority needed to be given the opportunity to express same.
He further went ahead to describe the work of the Justice Pwamang committee as a travesty of justice.
The Chairman of the Committee, Bernard Ahiafor, has adjourned proceedings temporarily to rule on the matter.
