Bagbin rejects Supreme Court writ on vacant seats ruling, returns documents

The Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin has directed the return of a set of court documents served by bailiffs on the Parliamentary Service, citing constitutional immunity under Article 117 of the 1992 Constitution.

This move, communicated through an official letter from the Office of the Speaker, highlights Parliament’s stance on judicial procedures involving Members of Parliament (MPs).

In a letter addressed to the Supreme Court, the Speaker’s office noted, “The attached processes which were left at the Legal Services Office of the Parliamentary Service by three bailiffs of the Court on Wednesday, 16th October 2024, are hereby returned.”

The statement signed by the Deputy Clerk of Parliament, Ebenezer Djietror, the Speaker’s office stated that this service attempt was contrary to established constitutional provisions and a recent directive from the Judicial Secretary.

According to the letter, Speaker Bagbin referenced a circular issued by Justice Cyra Pamela C.A. Korangteng, the Judicial Secretary, on July 12, 2024, with the title “Enforcement of articles 117 and 118 of the Constitution – Immunity from Service of Process and Arrest.”

“The Rt. Hon. Speaker has directed the return of the attached processes for your necessary action,” the letter concluded, suggesting that the Judiciary take note of the constitutional restrictions regarding the service of court documents to Members of Parliament.

Background

On October 18, the Supreme Court issued a stay of execution on Speaker Alban Bagbin’s ruling, which declared four parliamentary seats vacant.

Parliament was, in essence, instructed to recognise and allow the four MPs to fully represent their constituencies and carry out their official duties.

This directive will remain in effect, not for the 10 days initially requested by the applicants, but until the Supreme Court delivers its final ruling on the case.

The application to stay the Speaker’s decision was filed by NPP MPs who sought the Court’s intervention to halt the enforcement of the ruling that would have affected three of their colleagues and one from the NDC.

The application was filed ex parte, meaning that neither Speaker Bagbin nor Parliament was joined to the case.

This allowed the Court to consider the NPP MPs’ request without requiring the participation or response of the Speaker or other parliamentary authorities at this stage.

The case was heard by a panel of Supreme Court justices presided over by Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo.

On October 22, Alban Bagbin adjourned sitting in the House amid the vacant seats controversy.

This decision was made in a House filled with National Democratic Congress (NDC) legislators who had occupied the Majority side of the aisle.

The New Patriotic Party (NPP) Members of Parliament had walked out earlier due to a controversy with the opposition, who had taken over their seats after claiming to constitute the majority.

Source:www.myjoyonline.com