Berates comments by Mahama and Haruna on recent SC ruling
Supreme Court rules that Deputy Speakers can vote
Nana Akomea, Managing Director of Intercity STC Coaches Limited, has berated leadership of the opposition National Democratic Congress over their reaction to a recent Supreme Court ruling.
A seven-member bench ruled unanimously that Deputy Speakers of Parliament could vote on issues whiles presiding and they could also be counted to form a quorum when in the chair.
The NDC – as a party and as a Caucus – have expressed strong disagreement with the ruling with MPs on their side vowing to resist any such action from taking place.
Akomea, speaking on Good Morning Ghana programme said it was fair to critique the ruling but unacceptable to bastardize or scandalize the courts while doing so.
“I don’t know what the furore is and I am totally disappointed in the political leadership of the Minority side, the NDC, particularly President Mahama and Haruna Iddrisu. I am very disappointed with their reactions.
“The use of the Supreme Court is to settle disputes. That is all. You may disagree with the decisions of the Supreme Court, that is fine. You may disagree, criticize … it is fine, there is no problem.
“But you don’t bastardize and scandalize the court. President Mahama has described the judgment as a judgment of convenience, that is scandalizing the court,” he stressed.
When asked whether Mahama could not pass comments on the ruling, he stressed that his issue with the former president was where he impugned the integrity of the Justices.
“You can disagree, you can criticize but you don’t bastardize, scandalize. [The] descriptive use of convenience means they are not looking at the law, you have ascribed motives, that is what President Mahama has done,” he added.
The Minority leader addressed a press conference shortly after the ruling was handed down. Whiles rejecting the ruling, he stated that it appeared to be judicial support for the Electronic Transaction Bill (E-Levy).
Background
Following controversy over the rejection (by Minority) and later approval (by Majority) of the 2022 budget by one-sided Caucuses of the 8th Parliament, a private legal practitioner, Justice Abdulai, filed a case against the Attorney General at the Supreme Court.
He prayed the Court to interpret two Articles - 102 and 104 - of the 1992 Constitution and by so doing to declare the proceedings in Parliament on November 30, 2021, which led to the passage of the 2022 Budget and Economic Policy as unconstitutional.
He specifically cited the fact that the Presiding Speaker, First Deputy Speaker, Joseph Osei-Owusu, had counted his vote despite acting as Speaker.
However, in defence of the State, the Attorney-General, Godfred Yeboah Dame, argued that there was no express provision in the 1992 Constitution that stops a Deputy Speaker presiding over proceedings from voting or counting himself as part of MPs present to form the right quorum.
The Justice Jones Dotse-led bench ruled against the request and upheld that Deputy Speakers could vote and could be counted to form a quorum.
By so doing, they expunged portions of Parliament’s Standing Orders and directed that the House moves to amend and or enact the necessary Constitutionally compliant rules to guide their processes.
