The President’s comment on SC ruling on voting right of Deputy speakers is myopic – Speaker

The longest serving Member of Parliament and the current Speaker of the Parliament of Ghana has taken on the President of Ghana for his comment.

The President of Ghana, Nana Addo Danquah Akufo-Addo on Thursday, stated that the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court to allow Deputy speakers to vote on issues while presiding was an ‘open and shut’ one.

The Supreme Court of Ghana delivered again, this unanimous decision on Wednesday, March 10, 2022.

The Speaker of Parliament, Rt Hon Alban Bagbin, who is not happy about the comment of the President described his view as ”a myopic” one.

”The President’s comment is myopic and unfortunate. It only goes to worsen the schism between the Executive and Parliament” he stated.

In a short write-up, the Rt Hon Speaker, indicated that he did not want to comment on the ruling of the Supreme Court but did so due to the comment of the President.

Kindly read the full write-up below

Rt Hon Speaker Bagbin writes

Good morning comrades. I have resisted the temptation of making a comment on the judgment of the Supreme Court on the issue of the voting rights of Deputy Speakers when presiding. But the unfortunate and myopic comment of the President has compelled me to let it out.

The SC decision, is to say the least, not only an absurdity but a reckless incursion into the remit of Parliament.

The trend of unanimity is equally troubling. It doesn’t help explore and expand our legal jurisprudence.

The President’s comment is myopic and unfortunately. It only goes to worsen the schism between the Executive and Parliament.

The impartiality of the Speaker, Deputy Speaker or Presiding Officer has been tresusured and fought for by this country throughout our democratic development.

Mr President, the issue being discussed is not about Parliament being above the law. Everyone knows that Parliament is not above the law. The Executive and the Judiciary are equally not above the law. The issue being discussed is the political question doctrine. It took centuries to detail out the strands of this doctrine and the principles are settled as to when and how this closed book could be opened.

Please, I encourage the Plaintiff to go for a review.