Parliament approves 4 for Supreme Court; Says they exhibited competence

Parliament yesterday extolled the “competence” of all the four persons recently nominated by the President for appointment as Justices of the Supreme Court.

In a unanimous approval of the nominations of the four yesterday, the House said in spite of the few hiccups that characterised the vetting of one of them, Justice Clemence Jackson Honyenuga, a justice of the Court of Appeal, the four nominees generally proved that they were cut for the job at the apex court.

The other nominees were Justice Issifu Omoro Tanko Amadu, also a justice of the Appeal Court; Professor Henrietta J. A. N. Mensa-Bonsu, a former Law lecturer at the University of Ghana, and Mr Emmanuel Yonny Kulendi, a private legal practitioner.

The approval came after the Chairman of the Appointments Committee, Mr Joseph Osei-Owusu, had submitted the report on the nominees to the House and recommended their approval.

Contrary to the anticipated lengthy debate to precede the approval of Justice Honyenuga, the House unanimously endorsed the recommendation of the committee for his appointment and that of other nominees.

Justice Honyenuga failed to secure a unanimous approval from the Appointments Committee when he appeared before it for vetting on May 11, this year on the grounds that he publicly declared support for the President to be given a second term when he spoke for and on behalf of all the chiefs of the Afadzato South District at a durbar a few months ago.

After a 10-7 majority vote on his approval, the Minority said the report on his nomination would be sent to the plenary of Parliament for a full debate and for a vote to be taken, a move the Minority shelved yesterday.

Nominees competent

When Mr Osei-Owusu, who is also the First Deputy Speaker of Parliament, presented the report of the committee to the House, he said the committee was satisfied that the nominees had exhibited character, competence, independent thinking and depth of knowledge of the law.

He said the nominees assured the committee of the will to be above partisanship and interpret the law without fear or favour in the discharge of their duties.

“The nominees further demonstrated to the committee that the Constitution, being a living document, will not be interpreted with their biases and that the spirit and letter of the law will prevail for the good of the citizenry.

“No evidence of corruption, incompetence or biases in the performance of their respective roles in the legal sector was brought before the committee.

The committee accordingly finds the nominees suitable to be appointed as justices of the Supreme Court of Ghana,” he said.

Fidelity to the law

Seconding the motion, the Minority Leader, Mr Haruna Iddrisu said he supported the motion that the House approved the nominations of the four to the Supreme Court as recommended by the Appointments Committee.

He described Prof. Mensah-Bonsu as brilliant at the law and someone who had paid her dues with distinction, particularly, in shaping and contributing to the country’s criminal jurisprudence.

“She served as a member of the National Reconciliation Commission and what was significant is she demonstrated wit and will and it is important that justices of the Supreme Court show fidelity to the law and not to the appointing authority,” Mr Iddrisu said.

The Minority Leader also recalled the remarkable role the former law lecturer played when she served on the Emile Short Commission on the Ayawaso West Wuogon by-elections violence.

On Justice Amadu and Mr Kulendi , he said they showed high level of competence and moral aptitude, and urged them to show fidelity to the law and all constitutional matters that would come before them at the Supreme Court.

In relation to Justice Honyenugah, Mr Iddrisu said nobody should hold anything against the Justice of the Court of Appeal after apologising for his public declaration of support for the President for a second term few months ago.

He, however, called for ethical standards and values to be exhibited at its highest levels at the Supreme Court.

The Member of Parliament for North Tongu, Mr Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, commended the nominees for acquitting themselves creditably during their vetting.

He called for the freedom to be given to Supreme Court nominees to espouse their personal philosophies or beliefs on matters such as gay rights, human rights and freedom of religion without such philosophies ever being held against them when they became justices of the Supreme Court.

Acid test

The Majority Leader, Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu, said the appointment criteria of justices of the Supreme Court, as set out in Article 128 (4) of the Constitution, required that nominees were of high moral character, of proven integrity and the person should not be less than 15 years standing as a lawyer.

He said those criteria were the “acid test” that Parliament should, as a House, apply to justices nominated for the apex court, saying “we should be careful in applying other yardsticks that may adulterate what the House is required to do.”

“Going forward, a person’s religious and political beliefs should not disqualify him or her since in some jurisdiction one is even required to identify his political colouration just as we know the religious colouration of the people who come before us to the extent that they do not put the nation asunder.

“Mr Speaker, I am happy that at the end of the day, in spite of a few turbulence, the committee has come together to say with one voice that all the nominees exhibited character, competence, independent thinking and depth of knowledge of the law. These are the measuring rod,” he said.