Go back to your Minority seats – Jantuah tells NDC MPs

A leading member of the Convention People’s Party (CPP), Kwame Jantuah, has told the National Democratic Congress (NDC) Lawmakers to return to their Minority position in the House following the Supreme Court ruling that declared the action of the Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin to declare four seats vacant as unconstitutional.
Mr. Jantuah says there are important bills to be passed before this Parliament rises including the temporary budget for the handover of governance on January 7, 2025.
To that end, he asked the Speaker to recall Parliament immediately to consider these bills.




Speaking on the Big Issue on TV3 on Friday, November 15, Mr Jantuah said “The Supreme Court has made the decision, let the sleeping do lies. There are important bills to be passed before parliament rises, one of the bills is the temporary budget for handover so I will plead with the speaker to recall parliament, and let the sleeping dog lie.
“Let parliament reopen, NDC, you have made your point, Ghanaians who will support you will support, those who will not, will not do it, so please go back to your seats and let Parliament work. Mr. Speaker, recall parliament.”
He also cautioned the New Patriotic Party (NPP) lawmakers not to celebrate the Supreme Court decision to anger their colleagues in the NDC.

“The NPP shouldn’t now walk into parliament and celebrate, that arouses a lot of dissension,” he said.

The Supreme Court has ruled that a seat in parliament can only be vacated if the lawmaker has a switched political party. The apex court in its ruling on the case of the vacant seats also said that the ruling of the Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin cannot take effect in this current parliament.

The apex court said it is therefore unlawful for Mr Bagbin to rule that the lawmakers had vacated their seats just for the reason that they filed to contest as independent candidates in the 2024 elections.
“It follows from the above, therefore, that the only plausible conclusion which must necessarily flow from a holistic and contextual reading of Article 97(1)(g) and (h) is that an MP’s seat shall be vacated upon departure from the cohort of his elected party in Parliament to join another party in Parliament while seeking to remain in that Parliament as a member of the new party,” the court stated.




On Tuesday, November 12, the Supreme Court by a 5-2 majority decision upheld the suit filed by Alexander Afenyo-Markin. The two dissenting justices thought the apex court did not have jurisdiction over this matter.

The suit filed by Afenyo-Markin brought a stalemate in Parliament as the NDC members assumed the Majority position based on the Speaker’s ruling. This prompted the New Patriotic Party Members of Parliament to boycott proceedings of the House.
With the latest ruling by the Supreme Court, Parliament is expected to be recalled with the NDC MPs reverting to their original Minority status.

The conclusion of the concurrent opinion written by Justice Kwaku Adibu Asiedu said “In conclusion, I wish to state that a common thread runs through each of the provisions in article 97(1)(b) to (h) and that thread is a condition precedent without which a Member of Parliament cannot, in law, be said to have forfeited his seat in Parliament.



“The condition precedent is that the prohibited act or acts which can cause a Member of Parliament to vacate his seat in Parliament must affect his status as a Member of Parliament in the current session of Parliament. The condition precedent cannot be an act which has an effect, or which may have an effect, not in the current session of Parliament but a future Parliament.

“In my humble view, therefore, it is incorrect and unconstitutional for the 1st Defendant to rule that the Members of Parliament concerned have vacated their seats in Parliament just for the reason that they have filed nominations to contest, as Members of Parliament, in the upcoming general elections on tickets other than those on which they were voted as members of the current Parliament. It is for these reasons that I voted to grant relief one endorsed on the Plaintiff’s writ.”

Source:3news.com