Professor Ransford Gyampo, a Political Science lecturer at the University of Ghana has expressed disappointment in the dismissal of an appeal filed by the Speaker of Parliament challenging a stay of execution order by the Supreme Court over the speaker’s pronouncement declaring four parliamentary seats vacant.
The renowned political scientist argued that the decision represents not only judicial overreach but also a failure to uphold Parliament’s authority, raising serious concerns about the evolving power dynamics between Ghana’s judiciary and legislature.
“I disagree with the Supreme Court that there was absolutely no merit in the speaker’s position and hence something in my view could have been done yesterday to resolve the matter in a manner that would have brought a certain win-win situation but the Supreme Court yesterday was not considerate at all.”
Professor Ransford Van Gyampo, Political Science Lecturer at the University of Ghana
He voiced disappointment with how the case was handled, emphasizing that the Supreme Court’s decision may compromise the delicate balance of powers envisioned under the Constitution.
Allegations of Partisanship and Questionable Judicial Integrity
Professor Gyampo highlighted concerns surrounding the involvement of a judge who had previously stood as a parliamentary candidate for the New Patriotic Party (NPP).
He noted that the judiciary’s response to calls for the judge’s recusal was not only dismissive but also, in his view, indicative of a bias.
“The Supreme Court’s defense of the judge, despite his political affiliations, was troubling,” Professor Gyampo said, adding that such a stance further erodes the public’s trust in judicial neutrality. “I am worried about the constitutional crisis deepening in our country,” he remarked.
Sovereignty and Representation: Placing Parliament at the Forefront
In his analysis, Professor Gyampo argued that Parliament must retain precedence among the three branches of government, as it is the primary body representing the will of the people.
“In trying to locate sovereignty among the arms of government, at least in theory, and then if you look at things, it’s a simple O-level government thing that we are all learnt that parliament should come first because it is only parliament that is the arm of government that provides true representation for the people.
“Every Ghanaian is represented in parliament, but how many people elected President Akufo-Addo? You need only 50% plus one to be elected, President of Ghana. And do we elect our judges? No.”
Professor Ransford Van Gyampo, Political Science Lecturer at the University of Ghana
He thus argued that because of its comprehensive representation, Parliament should hold a level of sovereignty that is not subordinate to the courts.
Professor Gyampo cautioned that weakening Parliament’s authority undermines its role in representing the public’s interest, warning that any attempt to place Parliament under judicial subordination would disrupt the fundamental balance of power.
Supreme Court’s Selective Concern Over Representation
Moreover, Professor Ransford Van Gyampo expressed deep concerns about the Supreme Court’s argument that enforcing the Speaker’s pronouncement would result in the disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of citizens in the affected constituencies.
This concern, according to the Court, justified an injunction to prevent this outcome ahead of the upcoming elections. However, Professor Gyampo questioned this rationale, noting the inconsistency with the Court’s handling of similar cases.
Referring to the longstanding issue of the SALL (Santrokofi, Akpafu, Likpe, and Lolobi) communities, who have been denied parliamentary representation for nearly four years, Professor Gyampo highlighted a perceived double standard.
“While SALL people have been denied representation for almost 4 years, and this is not a matter that the Supreme Court is not aware of. The matter was sent first to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court said it should be sent to a high court. The High Court sat on the matter, it’s been go and come, go and come, and adjournment for 3 years and I’m told after 3 years, the High Court said it has no jurisdiction.
And we are all here watching. I was quite surprised to hear how the chief justice was pontificating on this matter of representation or the potential for denying people their representation. At the same time, she knew that others had been denied representation for over for almost 4 years.”
Professor Ransford Van Gyampo, Political Science Lecturer at the University of Ghana
Warning Against Ignoring Public Sentiments
In closing, Professor Gyampo warned that the Supreme Court’s apparent disregard for public sentiment and its failure to consider the political implications of its decisions might have long-term effects on stability and public trust in the judiciary.
“Elsewhere, judges are mindful of the implications their decisions may have on public policy, peace, and social cohesion. It seems that our judiciary has adopted a stance that dismisses these considerations”.
Professor Ransford Van Gyampo, Political Science Lecturer at the University of Ghana
Professor Gyampo emphasized that Ghanaians have a right to question a judiciary that, in his view, seems increasingly unconcerned with its image and public perception.
He suggested that had the Court handled the matter differently, it might have helped alleviate the current constitutional tension, instead, the judiciary’s actions, he argued, appear to have exacerbated it.
Professor Gyampo’s comments add to a growing discourse on the relationship between Ghana’s arms of government, with many questioning the judiciary’s expanding influence and the implications for democratic governance.
His statements underscore the importance of maintaining checks and balances among Ghana’s constitutional institutions, and he cautioned that judicial overreach could weaken the representative function of Parliament, ultimately distancing government from the people it is meant to serve.”
READ ALSO: Shatta Wale Eulogizes Girlfriend Maali
