Search
Close this search box.
GHANA WEATHER

Supreme Court rejects Bagbin’s request to overturn decision on vacant seats

Supreme Court rejects Bagbin's request to overturn decision on vacant seats
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
WhatsApp
Pinterest

By Ashiadey Dotse

The Supreme Court of Ghana has rejected an application from Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin, who wanted to overturn a previous decision stopping him from declaring four parliamentary seats vacant.

This ruling deepens the ongoing legal discussion about the Speaker’s authority and the judiciary’s involvement in parliamentary matters.

Speaker Bagbin’s application aimed to cancel the Supreme Court’s previous decision that temporarily paused his declaration on the four seats. He also requested that the court dismiss a petition by Majority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin, which asked for the court’s help to prevent further declarations on these seats.

Bagbin, represented by lawyer Thaddeus Sory, argued that the court overstepped by suspending his ruling, claiming it was a parliamentary issue, not a judicial one, and should not be affected by stays of execution—normally used only for court decisions.

Bagbin argued that under Ghana’s 1992 Constitution, the Supreme Court’s authority to stay rulings only applies to its own decisions or those of lower courts, not to rulings by the Speaker of Parliament, who is outside the judicial system.

The Speaker also emphasized that as leader of an independent government branch, his rulings are different from judicial decisions and should not be reviewed in the same way. He argued that the court’s involvement threatens Ghana’s balance of power between branches of government.

However, in her ruling, the Chief Justice stated that the court must address this matter quickly to prevent the harm that could be done to the constituencies left without MPs or the option for by-elections, especially with the risk of MPs losing their seats just before the December 7 election.

She noted the Supreme Court’s need to expedite the process by reducing the usual 14-day response period and asking the parties to submit their statements within seven days to resolve the matter more quickly.

The Chief Justice added that if all parties had followed these guidelines on time, the case could have been completed within the 10 days requested by the applicant.

More Stories Here

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

ADVERTISEMENT