At the court hearing on Monday, November 11, 2024, Counsel for the Speaker of Parliament, Thaddeus Sory, was notably absent, and Speaker Alban Bagbin’s statement of the case was also not filed.
The case was brought before the court by Alexander Afenyo-Markin, leader of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) parliamentary caucus. Afenyo-Markin is challenging Speaker Alban Bagbin’s declaration of the seats as vacant, arguing it was done without judicial oversight or the initiation of by-elections.
Central to the dispute is Speaker Bagbin’s interpretation of the 1992 Constitution regarding parliamentary vacancies. On October 17, 2024, Bagbin declared the four seats vacant, citing that the Members of Parliament (MPs) involved had violated constitutional requirements, which he claimed justified their removal from office.
At the last hearing, the Attorney-General questioned the legality of the Speaker’s continued representation by Thaddeus Sory, highlighting a lack of approval from the Public Procurement Authority.
The ruling by the Supreme Court is expected to provide clarity and finality on both the status of the four seats and the constitutional powers of the Speaker of Parliament.
Speaker Bagbin’s interpretation of the 1992 Constitution regarding parliamentary vacancies remains at the centre of the ongoing parliamentary dispute.
Afenyo-Markin’s suit against Speaker Bagbin argues that the Speaker overstepped his constitutional authority by declaring the four seats vacant on 17 September 2024 without judicial review.
He contends that only the judiciary has the authority to interpret the Constitution in such matters, and that the Speaker’s actions bypassed the appropriate judicial channels.
In his declaration, Speaker Bagbin stated that the four MPs at the centre of the controversy had breached constitutional requirements, which he believed warranted their removal from office.
An injunction by the Supreme Court initially stayed the Speaker’s ruling; however, Speaker Bagbin filed a motion to have the court’s decision reversed.
This motion was subsequently dismissed by the Supreme Court, which upheld its initial ruling, paving the way for this crucial upcoming judgment.
Background
The controversy arose after the Supreme Court stayed the Speaker’s decision to declare four seats vacant. This decision followed actions by the affected MPs, who had decided to “cross the carpet” by filing to contest the December 7, 2024, parliamentary elections in different capacities—either as independents or on other political party tickets.
This move diverged from the grounds on which these MPs were originally elected to Parliament.
The seats affected include those held by Cynthia Morrison (Agona West), Kwadjo Asante (Suhum), Andrew Amoako Asiamah (Fomena), and Peter Kwakye Ackah (Amenfi Central).
The dispute has also led to a standoff between the two sides of Parliament over which party holds the Majority. While the Supreme Court’s ruling places the NDC in the Minority, the Speaker’s decision positions the NPP in the Minority.
The core contention in this case centres on whether the Supreme Court has the authority to overrule parliamentary decisions.
