The ruling of the 5-member panel of the court, which was read by Justice Torkornoo, accused the Speaker of misconstruing a circular on service to his office to mean that he can only be served with a writ or injunction personally only on Mondays.
Sammy Gyamfi, during a panel discussion on Metro TV’s Good Morning Ghana, on October 31, 2024, shared a copy of the circular at the heart of the brouhaha, which showed that the Speaker of Parliament did no misconstruing.
The circular, which was titled ‘Enforcement of Articles 117 and 118 of the Constitution-Immunity from service of process and arrest’ and was issued by Justice Cyra Pamela CA. Korangteng, the Judicial Secretary, directed staff of the judicial service on how they can serve the Speaker of Parliament, the Clerk of Parliament, and Members of Parliament.
The document showed that the Speaker of Parliament can only be served on Mondays.
The Clerk of Parliament, on the other hand, can be served on Mondays and any other day through the legal department of Parliament, it said.
All the other offices of Parliament which could be served on other days except Mondays were boldly indicated.
The NDC national communications officer was bemused by the Chief Justice saying something different from a directive she issued.
He indicated that the judges should have at least gone for a copy of the circular to make sure their interpretation of it in the judgement was correct.
“This document says the only way you serve the Speaker is to serve the legal department of the Parliamentary Service and you can do that only on Mondays. Why would a woman who is Chief Justice alter this document herself?
“I’m sure that when they retired into chambers to write their ruling, I’m being fair to her, she would have even taken another look at the circular to refresh her memory. At least in interpreting the document, give the correct interpretation. This is the document that is coming from the Chief Justice,” he said.
He added, “Why would the Chief Justice lie this way? Is she Chief Justice or Chief of injustice? Why? This is a sacrilege. This is disgraceful,” he said.
What the Chief Justice said:
Reading the judgement of the court on the application filed by the Speaker, that challenged the court’s order for a stay of the declaration in the matter, on Wednesday, October 30, 2024, the Chief Justice rejected Bagbin’s claim that he can only be served on Mondays.
She indicated that the Speaker was misconstruing a circular on service to his office, which states that he can only be served personally on Mondays but through the legal department of Parliament, it can be done on any day.
“The official records of Parliament for 17th October 2024 were placed before the Supreme Court as an exhibit. The record shows that the processes of court had been served through the legal department of Parliament and this had been brought to the notice of the Speaker. He bantered extensively on this information with the plaintiff on the floor of Parliament and the Speaker’s only reason for choosing to quarrel with the summons from the Supreme Court, an application for an injunction to restrain him from ruling on a matter premised on the interpretation of Article 97(1)(G), was that as Speaker he was only supposed to be served with court processes on Monday.
“This is an unfortunate interpretation of the first column of the circular referred to because this circular provides for the Speaker of Parliament to be served personally on Mondays and through the legal department of Parliament on any day,” she said.
She added, “But whatever interpretation of the circular that the Speaker chose to put on how he was to be served, the Supreme Court is satisfied that the Speaker was well served with notice of the action that had been started on 15th October 2024 and seeking the correct interpretation of Article 97(1)(G) of the Constitution.”
The Chief Justice indicated that the Speaker should not have gone ahead to declare the four seats vacant as the injunction filed against it was well served to him.
What Speaker Bagbin said:
Speaker Alban Bagbin on October 17, 2024, before declaring the four seats vacant, indicated the writ and injunction from the Supreme Court had not been properly served on him when the matter was raised by the leader of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) Member of Parliament, Alexander Kwamina Afenyo-Markin.
He said that there was an arrangement with the Supreme Court that he can only be served on Mondays.
Subsequently, a letter from Parliament to the Supreme Court indicated that the Speaker rejected the service of a writ of the court.
The said letter, which was issued by a Deputy Clerk of Parliament, Ebenezer Ahumah Djietror, indicated that the Speaker has directed that the writ be sent back to the apex court of the land.
The letter indicated that the writ left by the bailiff who attempted to serve the Speaker on Tuesday, October 15, 2024, was contrary to Article 117 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana.
“I am directed by Rt. Hon. Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin, Speaker of Parliament, to return the attached processes which were left at the Legal Services Office of the Parliamentary Service, by three (3) bailiffs of the Court on Wednesday, 16 October 2024. Attempts were made to serve the same processes on Tuesday, 15 October 2024.
“The Rt. Hon. Speaker notes that the attempted service is contrary to Article 117 of the 1992 Constitution and the circular issued by Her Ladyship Justice Cyra Pamela CA. Korangteng (JA), the Judicial Secretary, and copied to the Honourable Lady Chief Justice, with reference number SCR9, entitled ‘Enforcement of articles 117 and 118 of the constitution-Immunity from service of process and arrest’ dated 12 July 2024 addressed to all registrars of courts,” part of the letter reads.
The letter concluded, “Consequently, the Rt. Hon. Speaker has directed the return of the attached processes for your necessary action.”
Watch videos of the remarks of Sammy Gyamfi, Chief Justice and the Speaker below:
