Justice Tanko concluded that Afenyo-Markin’s case failed to meet jurisdictional requirements
Supreme Court Judge Justice Amadu Tanko, dissenting in the 5:2 ruling on Efutu MP Alexander Afenyo-Markin’s case against Speaker Alban Bagbin, has expressed doubt about the decision's longevity.
He described the ruling as a departure from established constitutional principles and predicted it may be overturned in the future.
Justice Tanko argued that the Constitution grants the High Court exclusive authority to determine parliamentary vacancies, as stated in Article 99. He cautioned that the Supreme Court’s decision overstepped its jurisdiction, undermining the High Court's role.
Citing the principle generalia specialibus non derogant, he maintained that specific constitutional provisions, such as Article 99, should override the Supreme Court's general interpretive powers.
Justice Tanko concluded that Afenyo-Markin’s case failed to meet jurisdictional requirements, emphasizing that vacancy disputes should remain within the High Court’s domain.
Read the original article
- Vacant seats case: The speaker was clearly wrong – Freddie Blay
- Vacant seats case: Supreme Court did not make directives to the Speaker – Tsatsu Tsikata
- Togbe Afede criticises recent Supreme Court rulings as uninspiring and illogical
- Kufuor urges restraint in Supreme Court criticisms
- Court ensures fair hearing, even if one party is absent – Atuguba
- Read all related articles