The Minority Leader Dr Cassiel Ato Forson has said that a request to recall the House is ill-timed and will constitute a needless drain on the Ghanaian taxpayer.
He has suggested that the leadership in Parliament should meet immediately after the elections on December 7 to resolve the stalemate in the House.
He has therefore pleaded with the Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin to reject a call by the Majority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin to recall the House.
He says that this is the fourth time in 2024 alone that the NPP parliamentary caucus is requesting an urgent recall of Parliament.
At each of the previous urgent meetings, he said, many of the businesses stated as “so-called” urgent Government Business were abandoned.
The House was adjourned indefinitely on November 7, when Speaker Bagbin suspended proceedings due to the absence of a prepared agenda from the Business Committee.
Alexander Afenyo-Markin, lawmaker for Effutu, later urged Speaker Bagbin to exercise his constitutional mandate under Standing Orders 57(3) and 58(4) to reconvene Parliament to address the outstanding business of the House.
In a memo to the speaker, Dr Ato Forson, also lawmaker for Ajumakor Enyan Essiam said that “Rt. Hon. Speaker, the petitioner’s request is premised on an appeal to you to exercise your discretion to recall Parliament to consider what they have termed “high priority” government business. They proceeded to enumerate the said businesses.
“Respectfully, Mr. Speaker, we wish to submit that based on the petitioner’s own request, you are not obliged to recall Parliament. Further, the petitioner has not demonstrated that there is any emergency nor urgent government business to warrant a recall of Parliament, with barely eleven (11) remaining days to the crucial 2024 General Election.”
He further stated that “In less than two weeks, Ghanaians will be going to the polls to elect a President and members of Parliament. Both the electorate and those running for office must be accorded these few remaining days to engage meaningfully so that the people of Ghana can make an informed choice.
“Rt. Hon. Speaker, this recall that is being requested is ill-timed and will constitute a needless drain on the Ghanaian taxpayer. We therefore respectfully urge you to reject this call in the national interest.
“Again, with barely eleven (11) days to the elections, a recall of the House at this time will only fuel the unresolved stalemate that has prevailed in recent time. We must avoid anything that has the potential to disturb the peace of our country and stability of our democracy. Rather, let us prioritise the conduct of credible, peaceful, free and fair elections at this stage.
“I therefore suggest a leadership meeting after the elections to resolve the stalemate and to agree on a suitable date to recall the House to consider any outstanding Government Business.”
It is recalled that the Supreme Court annulled the ruling of the speaker in declaring four seats vacant.
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 Supreme Court has ruled that a seat in parliament can only be vacated if the lawmaker has a switched political party.
The Supreme 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.
“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.
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.”
With the latest ruling by the Supreme Court, Parliament is expected to be recalled with the NDC MPs reverting to their original Minority status.
Source:3news.com