|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The founder and leader of the Movement for Change, Alan Kyerematen, has condemned the ongoing stand-off between the Supreme Court and the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, stating that it is unhealthy for the country’s democracy.
At a press engagement on Thursday, October 31, the former trade minister, now an independent presidential candidate in the 2024 election, said that both Parliament and the Supreme Court have mishandled the case of the vacant seats.
“The current impasse between the Supreme Court and Parliament is unwarranted, unjustifiable, unproductive, and unhealthy for our fledgling democracy. Both the Supreme Court and Parliament must respect the Constitution and the laws of Ghana. This impasse amounts to grandstanding by both institutions.”
He described the Supreme Court’s decision to adhere to Alexander Afenyo-Markin’s application as unconstitutional, stating, “The Supreme Court, in its ruling on the application of the Leader of the NPP Caucus in Parliament, Hon. Alexander Afenyo-Markin, to reverse the ruling of the Speaker of Parliament regarding the status of the four Members of Parliament, was and is, in my considered and respectful opinion, unconstitutional, and could be described as an abuse of the power of the Supreme Court under Article 130 (1) to interpret provisions of the Constitution.”
Concerning Parliament, Mr Kyerematen argued that it would be a breach of the law should the Speaker reject the Supreme Court’s ruling, as Article 133 (1) of the Constitution of Ghana binds all individuals and state institutions to the Supreme Court.
“Parliament will be in breach of the law if it refuses to accept the ruling of the Supreme Court. Even if Parliament believes that the Supreme Court’s decision is wrong, it must comply with the orders of the Court and adopt a judicial path to resolve the matter.”
He further stated that the Speaker had taken the right step in filing to the Supreme Court to reverse its initial ruling regarding the vacant seats. “Parliament took the right step, albeit belatedly, in filing an application for the review of the Supreme Court’s decision. However, it is my considered and respectful opinion that the course of action and the associated remedies endorsed in the writ of application from Parliament are meritorious and lack judicial grounding. By arguing that the decision of the Supreme Court cannot affect a non-judicial order of Parliament, it is a subversion of the rule of law and an abuse of the judicial process.”
source:Myjoyonline.com