The Supreme Court has ruled against Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin’s declaration of four parliamentary seats as vacant, siding with a legal challenge led by Majority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin.
In a decision handed down on Tuesday, the seven-member panel, headed by Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, reached a 5-2 majority in favor of Afenyo-Markin. Chief Justice Torkornoo announced that a detailed judgment would follow to clarify the Court’s rationale.
The case centers on Speaker Bagbin’s interpretation of Article 97(1)(g) of the Ghanaian Constitution, which he cited as justification for declaring the seats vacant. This move drew considerable political and legal resistance, with Afenyo-Markin asserting that Bagbin had overstepped his authority by bypassing judicial scrutiny and forgoing the necessary by-elections in the constituencies in question.
Previously, the Supreme Court issued an interim injunction to halt the Speaker’s directive. In response, Speaker Bagbin filed a counter-motion, asserting that parliamentary decisions fall outside judicial purview under the separation of powers.
Bagbin’s lawyer, Thaddeus Sory, argued that judicial intervention in parliamentary decisions could breach the autonomy of the legislative branch. However, Chief Justice Torkornoo upheld the Court’s right to step in when parliamentary actions appear to infringe on constitutional rights.
Expressing concern over the potential loss of representation for affected constituents ahead of the December 7 general elections, Chief Justice Torkornoo emphasized the importance of upholding citizens’ rights to parliamentary representation through by-elections if seats are declared vacant.
Both parties were directed to submit their statements of claim within a week to facilitate a swift resolution. The case highlights significant questions about the balance of power between Parliament and the judiciary, underscoring the Court’s role in enforcing constitutional safeguards while respecting parliamentary independence.
