The Member of Parliament for Bawku Central Hon. Mahama Ayariga insisted on the ongoing parliamentary debate surrounding the Speaker of Parliament’s decision to declare four parliamentary seats vacant.

The conversation focused on the Speaker’s handling of a Supreme Court directive to keep the declaration of these seats vacant.

Hon. Ayariga’s explanation sheds light on the procedural implications of the Speaker’s statements and their impact on parliamentary work.

Hon. Ayariga began by reiterating the Speaker’s position regarding the four parliamentary seats.

According to Hon. Ayariga, the Speaker had declared the seats vacant on a prior occasion and had not indicated any change in that position during subsequent parliamentary sessions.

“The speaker communicated his position [it was] clearly. On Tuesday yesterday, he did not say that what I did on [was] undone. So, I don’t even know the basis on which you are questioning what is the position of the speaker now. If he has a new position, he will tell all of us.”
Hon. Mahama Ayariga Member of Parliament for Bawku Central

Hon. Ayariga further clarified that, in the absence of a direct statement from the Speaker reversing the declaration, Parliament must continue to operate under the assumption that the seats are vacant. He emphasized; “The 4 seats remain vacant until he says otherwise.”

Supreme Court’s Stay Order and the Speaker’s Discretion

The discussion then turned to the Supreme Court’s involvement in the matter. The court had issued a directive to stay the Speaker’s declaration of the vacant seats, effectively putting the decision on hold.

However, Hon. Ayariga argued that the court’s directive does not automatically bind the Speaker unless he explicitly accepts it.

“The court is directing the speaker to stay. But the speaker has not said that he will stay. Infact, the speaker may disagree with the court. He may keep doing what he’s doing and go to the court to tell them I disagree with you. Review your decision because I will not comply with your decision because it is wrong.”
Hon. Mahama Ayariga Member of Parliament for Bawku Central

“Until he accepts and communicates to the house that he has accepted and will stay, the position that remains is that those 4 seats are vacant.”
Hon. Mahama Ayariga Member of Parliament for Bawku Central

No Implicit Assumptions: Waiting for Express Communication

Mahama 2 — Hon. Mahama Ayariga Member of Parliament for Bawku Central

Hon. Ayariga stressed that Parliament should not act based on assumptions or implied decisions. Instead, the body must rely on clear, explicit communication from the Speaker regarding any changes to the status of the seats in question. He emphasized; “We will act based on express communication from the speaker, not implying things. No, We will not imply anything.”

Hon. Ayariga further underscored the Speaker’s authority within the parliamentary framework, pointing out that the Speaker is solely responsible for presiding over parliamentary proceedings.

“He’s the one who tells us what to do and what not to do, not the courts. The court communicates with him. If he accepts it, then he communicates to us.”
Hon. Mahama Ayariga Member of Parliament for Bawku Central

The Speaker’s Cautious Approach to the Court’s Directive

Reflecting on the Speaker’s recent actions, Hon. Ayariga highlighted the Speaker’s careful approach when addressing the court’s directive in Parliament.

According to Hon. Ayariga, the Speaker did not divulge the full details of the court’s processes to the House, choosing instead to acknowledge their receipt without incorporating them into the official parliamentary record.

As such, members of Parliament must await further clarification or instruction from the Speaker before taking any action related to the vacant seats.

“He didn’t even tell us the content of the processes so that the content of the processes would become part of the record of the house. No. He didn’t. He only said I’ve received some processes.”
Hon. Mahama Ayariga Member of Parliament for Bawku Central

In conclusion, Hon. Mahama Ayariga’s remarks provide a nuanced interpretation of the Speaker’s handling of the parliamentary seats declared vacant. According to Hon. Ayariga, until the Speaker explicitly communicates a change in his decision, Parliament must continue to treat the seats as vacant.

Hon. Ayariga also highlighted the Speaker’s discretion in responding to the Supreme Court’s stay order, suggesting that the Speaker may challenge the court’s directive rather than automatically comply with it.

Ultimately, Hon. Ayariga’s position underscores the importance of clear and express communication in guiding parliamentary action in such matters.