The Caucus for Democratic Governance (CDG-GH) has described the ruling of the Supreme Court that a Deputy Speaker of Parliament has the right to vote as “Reckless, Absurd and Irresponsible”.
According to CDG-GH, the ruling is Reckless because it did not consider the logical impact, and Absurd because “it is unreasonable, foolish and ridiculous for a team of officiating referees to score for one team against the other”.
“The Caucus for Democratic Governance (CDG-GH) after discussions with its lawyers has come to the conclusion that the Supreme Court ruling on the voting right of the Deputy Speaker is reckless, absurd and irresponsible… Irresponsible because the impression created seeks to suggest that the Judiciary is an appendage of the Executive”.
CDG-GH
A seven-member panel of the Supreme Court on Wednesday, March 9, 2022, unanimously held that upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 103 and 104 of the 1992 Constitution, a Deputy Speaker who happens to be a Member of Parliament does not lose his right to take part in decision making in Parliament when sitting-in for the Speaker of the House.
Deputy Speakers, not to vote when presiding
However, a press release by CDG-GH signed by its Executive Director, Dr. E.K Hayford, stated that just as the Speaker does not vote, his Deputies should not also vote in deliberations when presiding.
“It is important to note that our definite type of democracy governed by our Constitution, is different from the British (West Minister) type. Voting right does not reside in the Speakership. The Speakership consist of the Speaker and his two Deputies. Just as the Speaker does not vote, so his Deputies do not vote in a deliberation when presiding”.
CDG-GH
The Caucus for Democratic Governance further stated that Parliament is a deliberating forum where deliberations are sorted out, and decisions arrived at, with the Speaker or Deputy Speaker as a presiding referee. This, according to CDG-GH, “is similar to a football match where we have two teams and an officiating referee. It will be reckless, absurd and irresponsible and stupid for the officiating referee, at his convenience, to score for one team against the other”.
“The President`s comment (on Supreme Court decision) is myopic and unfortunate. It only goes to worsen the schism between the Executive and Parliament. The Supreme Court decision, is to say the least, not only an absurdity but a reckless incursion into the remit of Parliament”, CDG-GH quoted Rt Hon Speaker, Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin in the statement.
Consequences of misinterpreting the constitution
CDG-GH emphasized that “The trend of unanimity which such decisions can bring is equally troubling and does not help to explore and expand our legal jurisprudence”.
“The Executive, Parliament and Judiciary are three arms of Government which function within the control system of the Constitution. Any attempt to subvert the interpretation of the Constitution can have damaging consequences. Similarly, any attempt by the Judiciary to be subservient to the Executive- its appointing organ, can also provoke tragic consequences”.
CDG-GH
As such, the Caucus for Democratic Governance advised that “it is prudent to leave the remit of Parliament to the Legislators”.
READ ALSO: Parliament Not A Supreme Arm of State- Joseph Kpemka
