Brouhaha in Parliament: CDD-Ghana calls for restraint

The Ghana Centre for Democratic Development (CDD-Ghana) has urged all Members of Parliament (MPs), political parties, the Executive and the media to act with maximum restraint, a sense of responsibility and respect for the letter and spirit of the constitutional principles and processes that underpin Ghana’s democracy. 

It urged all stakeholders to prioritise the preservation of the nation’s peace and stability and work diligently to avoid a recurrence of the regrettable scenes witnessed during the Speaker’s election on January 7, 2021.

“To deescalate the current tension and uphold the rule of law, CDD-Ghana encourages the Speaker and Parliament to fully comply with the Supreme Court’s directions, notwithstanding disagreements with the ruling,” it said.

A statement issued by CDD-Ghana noted that the timely filing of the required legal documents would ensure the case proceeded swiftly, and help provide clarity and resolution, stressing that “the Speaker and Parliament also retain the option to seek a review of the Court's decision, should it find it necessary.”

Diversity 

It said CDD-Ghana acknowledged the diversity of views in the public discourse surrounding the issue, particularly the legal opinions regarding both the Speaker's actions and the Supreme Court’s intervention.

It said the current situation presented a novel challenge to Ghana's constitutional practice.

“It requires careful and sensitive handling to prevent the onset of constitutional and political turmoil, particularly as the country approaches the 2024 general election,” it stated. 

Reflection

The statement called for a deep reflection on the relevant constitutional provisions governing parliamentary seats, especially during election years.

“It is vital to ensure that remedies are available for affected individuals and parties without plunging the nation into legal or political uncertainty. Additionally, CDD Ghana believes that all outstanding cases seeking to disqualify any candidate from the upcoming elections should be resolved expeditiously,” it stated.

It said that would ensure that no candidate was unfairly deprived of their rights or opportunity to contest, maintaining fairness in the electoral process.

“In the spirit of national unity, we urge all Ghanaians to remain calm, respect the judicial process, and continue to uphold peace as we collectively safeguard Ghana’s democracy,” it said.

Background

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

This followed a petition by a former Minority Leader and MP for Tamale South, Haruna Iddrisu, who argued that pursuant to Article 97 (g) and (h), the four MPs have forfeited their seats.

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, had filed to contest the Fomena seat on the ticket of the governing NPP.

The next day after the Speaker of Parliament’s ruling, the Supreme Court put it on hold until the final determination of a suit seeking an interpretation of Article 97(g) and (h), following an ex parte motion of a stay of execution.

The Supreme Court held that if the ruling by the Speaker was not stayed, it would render the issues for determination in the substantive suit nugatory.

Again, the apex court was of the view that the ruling by the Speaker ought to be stayed because the four MPs were not given a hearing before their seats were declared vacant.

“On the balance of the law, exhibits and facts placed before us, we are satisfied that the duly elected representatives in question were not heard on the extremely critical issue raised.”

“Consequently, the court put on hold the ruling by the Speaker pending the final determination of the suit which is seeking a constitutional interpretation of Article 97(g) and (h) of the 1992 Constitution,” the Supreme Court stressed.