We’re still majority caucus in Parliament -  NDC MPs

The members of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) Caucus in Parliament have asserted that the Speaker’s declaration of four seats in the House vacant still holds and they now constitute the Majority Caucus in the House.

They, therefore, have expressed their readiness to jealously protect their new majority status and would not bow, retreat nor surrender their lawfully earned status.

“We will also not abdicate our responsibility to the people no matter what and nothing, absolutely nothing, will change this position,” it said.

Parliament unimpeachable 

Addressing a press conference in Parliament today, the Leader of the NDC Caucus in Parliament, Dr Cassiel Ato Forson, said they were fortified that the proceedings of Parliament “shall not” be "impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament."

“Any interference with the business of Parliament is unlawful, unacceptable and shall be resisted,” it said.
Declaration

On Tuesday, October 15, 2024, Dr Forson, in a statement, drew the attention of the Speaker to the decision of four MPs to context the next parliamentary elections as independent candidates.

He said Peter Yaw Kwakye-Ackah, an MP for Amenfi Central, who was elected on the ticket of the NDC, had filed to contest the upcoming election as an independent candidate with the Electoral Commission, while Andrew Asiamah Amoako, an independent MP for Fomena, and until recently the Second Deputy Speaker, had filed to contest the election on the ticket of the New Patriotic Party (NPP).

He also said Kwadjo Asante, an MP for Suhum, who was elected on the ticket of the NPP, had filed to contest as an independent candidate, with Cynthia Maamle Morrison, the MP for Agona West, who was elected on the ticket of the NPP, had filed to contest as an independent candidate.

He further drew the attention of the Speaker to the constitutional implications of the conduct of the four individuals involved and concluded that by the provisions of article 97(1)(g) and (h), they had vacated their seats as members of the Eighth Parliament.

Article 97(1), (8) and (h) reads: (1) A Member of Parliament shall vacate his seat in Parliament-(g) "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; or (h) If he was elected a member of Parliament as an independent candidate and joins a political party”.

Following the request by Dr Forson, Speaker in line with Order 18 of the Standing Orders of Parliament which mandatorily places sole responsibility on the Speaker to communicate vacancy of seats in Parliament, informed the House of the vacancies of the four seats.
Restore MPs

However, following an ex-part application Majority MPs filed at the Supreme Court, the apex court halted the Speaker’s decision.
In a ruling last Friday, a five-member panel of the court, presided over by Chief Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo, held that declaring the seats vacant was  against the rights of their constituents who elected the affected MPs.  
Lawful exercise

Dr Forson said the Speaker's decision to declare the four seats vacant was a lawful exercise of his responsibility derived from the Constitution and the Standing Orders of Parliament.
He said the effect of the Speaker's declaration was that currently there was no longer an independent MP in the House, with the NPP having 135 members and NDC 136 members.

“There is no Second Deputy Speaker of Parliament and this effectively alters the configuration of the Eighth Parliament.

“The NPP group in Parliament are now the Minority Caucus as defined by the relevant section of Order (6) of our Standing Orders,” he said.

External interference unacceptable 

Dr Forson indicated that they were fortified that the proceedings of Parliament shall not be "impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament."

“Any interference with the business of Parliament is unlawful, unacceptable and shall be resisted. We have never hidden our position that we are in this Parliament for the ordinary Ghanaian,” he said. 

Speaker acted fairly 

Dr Forson said following the Speaker’s declaration of four seats of the said MPs vacant, they were confident that the Speaker has acted fairly, firmly and lawfully in a matter that was perfectly within his province.

He said Speaker Bagbin had had a distinguished and unprecedented 32-year career in the Parliament of Ghana, describing him as “as a courageous and resolute leader”.

“We stand with him, pledge our full support and urge him to protect the dignity and sanctity of the Parliament of Ghana.

“In the same vein, we call on Ghanaians to stand by the Speaker and to resist oppressor's rule,” he said.

Dr Forson, who is also the MP for Ajumako-Enyan-Essiam, said from day one, his caucus had not reneged on their fight for the people of Ghana.

“The opportune time has come and we are determined to immediately commence the process of reversing the Akufo-Addo/Bawumia mess and put our country back on track.

“The people of Ghana can count on us and be rest assured that the NDC majority will protect their interest,” he said.

New private members bills

Dr Forson pointed out that the new Majority Caucus would use their new numbers to benefit Ghanaians by introducing private members bills to remove the e-Levy to reduce the suffering of the people.

He said they would also remove the betting tax and other nuisance taxes.

“Already, this NPP government has made Ghana a high tax regime and that is affecting the survival of businesses and the people.

“We assure you that we will use our new majority to protect businesses and the people of Ghana, as we have always maintained.
No law bars Speaker

Reacting to the Supreme Court’s directive to Parliament to suspend the Speaker’s decision on the four MPs, a member of the NDC Caucus, Mahama Ayariga, said there was no law or constructional provision that enabled anybody to suspend a decision of the Speaker or to Parliament properly constituted.

He said under article 2 and 130 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court had the jurisdiction to make a declaration as to whether or not an act was consistent or inconsistent with a provision of the Constitution.

“But we are not aware of any legal basis to suspend a decision of Parliament or a directive of the Speaker in Parliament,” he said.
On the precedent set by former