NewsPolitics

Supreme Court ruling: I’m shocked but not surprised, says Mahama

John Mahama says the decision of the apex court on Wednesday does not come as a surprise to him, adding it sets a dangerous precedent of judicial interference in Parliamentary procedure.

Former president John Mahama has described Wednesday’s ruling of the Supreme Court giving Deputy Speakers the right to vote and be counted when presiding in Parliament as “shocking.”

However, he said the decision does not come as a surprise to him.

“A unanimous 7-0? Shocking but not surprising,” Mahama posted on Facebook on Thursday (10 March).

He added: “An unfortunate interpretation for convenience that sets a dangerous precedent of judicial interference in Parliamentary procedure for the future.”

READ  SONA 2021: Let’s accept Supreme Court’s verdict and move on, says Akufo-Addo

The ruling

A seven-member Supreme Court panel, presided over by Justice Jones Victor Mawulorm Dotse, has by unanimous decision declared that the two Deputy Speakers of Parliament remain Members of Parliament when they are presiding and that they can vote and be counted as present for purposes of decision-making in the House.

The Supreme Court ruled that Order 109 (3) of the Standing Orders of Parliament, which state that “a Deputy Speaker or any other member presiding shall not retain his original vote while presiding”, is unconstitutional and same is struck out as unconstitutional.

READ  Mahama’s ‘Building Ghana Tour’ Train Heads to Volta

Apart from the presiding judge, Justice Jones Dotse, the other members of the panel were Justices Nene Amegatcher, Professor Nii Ashie Kotey, Mariama Owusu, Avril Lovelace Johnson, Clemence Honyenuga and Yonni Kulendi.

Travesty of justice

The Minority Leader in Parliament, Haruna Iddrisu, has described the Supreme Court’s declaration as a travesty of justice relating to parliamentary practice.

“Our attention has been drawn to a very disappointing ruling of the Supreme Court of Ghana which more or less amounts to a judicial interference in time-tested parliamentary practice and established conventions,” Iddrisu told journalists in Parliament on Wednesday (9 March).

READ  Asiedu Nketiah’s testimony was taken out of context just to dismiss petition – Mahama
Haruna Iddrisu (NDC), Minority Leader
Haruna Iddrisu

“Everywhere in the world in civilised democracies, including the United Kingdom, the presiding officer’s vote is discounted, so it is not for nothing that Article 102 provides that a person presiding shall have no original nor casting vote.

“The Supreme Court to put it aptly, this ruling is judicial support for E-Levy, for a struggling economy in distress, and judicial support for the restoration of a matter they have said is constitutional, it is repugnant but what can we do. This is a travesty of parliamentary justice,” he declared.

Source: Asaaseradio

Tags

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button
Close
Close