The Speaker of Parliament, Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin, is expected to state his position on the statement seeking a declaration of four seats in Parliament vacant.

This position will either be a directive or a ruling after observing how members on both sides of the aisle commented on the statement made by the Minority Leader, Cassiel Ato Forson, during sitting on Tuesday, this week.

The Speaker, who asked for two days to prepare a reasoned “ruling in this matter,” has his timeline due today as he made the request on Tuesday, October 15, 2024, when the statement was made and members passed comments.

Asking for leave to prepare a written response, the Speaker made the point that both the statement and the comments had raised quite serious issues of procedure and substantive law, and as such he needed time to deal with them.

“And so, I want to take a few days to submit a reasoned ruling in this matter. I see that this is not only an urgent matter but a very serious national issue,” he said.

According to the former Nadowli/Kaleo legislator, his experience, having gone through all the various constitutions and having gone through all the Parliaments in the Fourth Republic, “I think I’ll have to do justice to the subject. And so, I need to present to you a very well thought out ruling.

“So please kindly give me these two days and I’ll come here with a well-written ruling. I will submit it to all of you so that at the end of the day, justice would have not only been done, but would have been seen to be manifestly done in this matter,” he added.

STATEMENT

The Minority Leader, Cassiel Ato Forson, in making his statement told the House that he was coming under Order 93 of the Standing Orders of Parliament, on the matter which he said was of public importance.

He said his attention had been drawn to the issue that Peter Kwakye Ackah, the current NDC Member of Parliament (MP) for Amenfi Central in the Western Region, and Cynthia Mamle-Morrison, the current MP for Agona West constituency in the Central Region, have filed with the Electoral Commission to contest as independent candidates.

Also, Andrew Amoako Asiamah, the current independent MP for Fomena, Ashanti Region and Kwadwo Asante, the current NPP MP for Suhum, Eastern Region, have filed to contest as NPP and independent candidates respectively.

He referred to the November 2020 situation that involved Andrew Amoako Asiamah, where the NPP argued that by his decision to contest as an independent candidate whilst he was a sitting NPP MP, Mr. Asiamah had vacated his seat in accordance with Article 97, clause one, sub-clause G of the 1992 Constitution.

This position of the NPP, Ato Forson recalled, was upheld by the then Speaker of Parliament, Prof Aaron Michael Oquaye, who took action to enforce the said Article.

“Mr. Speaker, this ruling was not contested and has still not been contested and remains good and valid as a rule of this House,” the Minority Leader recalled.

“Right Honourable Speaker we, therefore, call on you to enforce the existing ruling of this House, based on Article 97(1)(G) and (H),” Ato Forson added.

He continued that, “This means that currently we do not have an independent Member of Parliament. The NPP has only 135 members of Parliament, having seen two of their members contested as independent candidates and the NDC has 136 members of Parliament, having lost one member. Therefore, the NPP group cannot continue to hold themselves as the majority caucus of this House, Mr. Speaker, I so submit.”

PRELIMNARY ISSUE

The Majority Leader, Alexander Afenyo Markin, responded to the submission by the Minority Leader, during which he raised preliminary issues to say that the argument of Ato Forson “falls flat.”

According to him, the argument by Ato Forson that there was precedence, did not hold water, explaining that whereas Speaker Oquaye acted based on a petition, there is no petition either from the NPP or the NDC in the current circumstance.

RULE

The Majority Leader, Afenyo Markin, who is a lawyer, first said his colleague cited the wrong Order to call on the Speaker to make a ruling on a statement.

He explained that Order 93 deals with statements, but after statements are made, members will make comments and the speaker may give directives.

“With the greatest respect, Honourable Minority Leader, if you want to invoke the rule, invoke it rightly. What you are trying to do by inviting Mr. Speaker to make a ruling has to do with a statement.

“The provision does not clothe you with that power to make that application, and you should get it. The provision that you quoted, you got it completely wrong. You got your rule wrong and you should know this.”

His position was supported by the MP for Essikado-Ketan, Joe Ghartey, who cited Order 93 and said the Speaker could only refer the matter to the petition committee.

“Order 93 states what he can do in these circumstances. And I end by that quotation. When a member makes a statement, the Speaker, considering the comments of the statement, may direct a committee to investigate and enquire into the matter. The Speaker, respectfully, in these circumstances, cannot rule.”

THE LAW

Most of the members who passed comments on the statement had intercourse with the law. Mostly lawyers, the period of the commentaries was rich with legal construal, interspersed with subtle jabs at non-Lawyer MPs, who attempted heckling Lawyer-MPs during their submissions.

For instance, Afenyo Markin told the Minority Leader, who is not a Lawyer but an Economist, that, “Ato, this is Law, not Economics.”

He went on to say that his colleague, Haruna Iddrisu, who is a Lawyer, had followed the right procedure to petition the Speaker on the matter.

When Dr Dominic Ayine rose to comment on the side of the Minority, he also took a jab at Afenyo Markin, saying that he taught him law. Soon after, Joe Ghartey also took the floor and during his submission, told Ayine that he had also been teaching law long before Dr Ayine started, so he should also listen. These side comments were always met with a moment of laughter from both sides.

Whereas Afenyo Markin and Joe Ghartey argued that the forum, Parliament, was wrong to determine the matter, Dr Ayine and others in the minority maintained that the law was clear and that Parliament could make a determination on its own.

The position of the majority, as stated by Afenyo Markin, was that the mere fact these MPs have declared their intentions should not lead to them vacating the seats, arguing that neither the political parties of these members have sacked them nor have they written to resign and join another party.

Joe Ghartey said unlike the Wayo Seini issue, the current one was not straight forward. He said that he was in the chamber when Wayo Seini stated on the floor that he had ditched the NDC and moved to sit with the NPP, which automatically meant his seat had become vacant.

The Majority Leader came back to state that to deal with the various arguments on the true interpretation of Article 97, he had filed a suit at the Supreme Court. The suit, he said, is accompanied with an injunction that prohibits Parliament from taking any action on the matter until the case is determined in court.

But the disclosures did not stop Dr. Ayine from disagreeing with the arguments that an action must be triggered, as happened in the Andrew Asiamah case.

He argued that the fact that the NPP petitioned the Speaker before an action was taken did not mean that was the only way to go subsequently.

Dr Ayine disagreed with the majority calling for the Andrew Asiamah process that led to the action to be followed in the current case, “but we are saying that what the Right Honourable Aaron Michael Oquaye, Professor of Political Science, that ruling, that erudite ruling that he delivered, we are saying that, Mr. Speaker (Bagbin), you should stay by this ruling.”

Commenting on the Afenyo Markin suit, which seeks an interpretation of Article 97, Ayine said the majority leader was inviting the court to take an advisory opinion on a matter that Parliament has not yet taken a decision on.

He said the Supreme Court made it clear in Tuffour versus Attorney General that it does not give advisory opinions. He added that in the same case cited, the Court said that whatever happens in Parliament is a closed book.

Dr Ayine opined that Afenyo Markin, by that, the action appeared to be wanting to gag the speaker and Parliament.

“Mr. Speaker, do not allow yourself to be gagged. Mr. Speaker, the members of this House will not be gagged by the action that he (the Majority Leader) has filed.

“We are going to speak out on this matter, and this House will perform its constitutional duty to take a decision with respect to the actions of the members involved,” he said.