Attorney General Godfred Dame has submitted his statement as the second defendant in the Supreme Court case brought by Majority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin, challenging Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin’s decision to declare four parliamentary seats vacant. The case stems from Bagbin’s ruling that three MPs, who intend to run as independent candidates in the December 2024 elections, must vacate their seats.
Additionally, an Independent Candidate, MP for Fomena Andrew Asiamah has also filed to contest the 2024 Parliamentary election on the ticket of the NPP. Afenyo-Markin, seeking clarity on this matter, argued that the MPs should retain their seats until the end of the current parliamentary term. In response, the Supreme Court issued a stay of execution on Bagbin’s ruling, temporarily halting the enforcement of the Speaker’s decision.
In his statement dated October 21, 2024, Godfred Dame argued that merely filing nominations for future elections does not automatically disqualify MPs from holding their current seats. He asserted that an MP’s seat can only be vacated during the ongoing parliamentary term if they switch parties or officially declare themselves as independent while still serving within the present Parliament.
This clarification is crucial as it challenges the Speaker’s ruling and emphasizes that running as an independent candidate in a future election should not result in the immediate forfeiture of a parliamentary seat. According to him, all branches or agencies of government, including Parliament, are subject to the Constitution and the Supreme Court’s judicial review powers to determine the constitutionality of their actions and decisions.
The Attorney General requested that the Supreme Court interpret the Constitution as a whole, ensuring that all relevant parts are considered in relation to the current case
On Tuesday, October 23, the Speaker adjourned the parliamentary session indefinitely due to a lack of quorum. However, the Minority caucus is standing firm on its claim to being the Majority, despite a recent court ruling. They argue that until the Speaker makes an official communication, they remain the Majority.
