A member of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) Communications Team, Abdul Hammed has strongly dismissed what he termed as a deliberate narrative creating an impression that the Speaker of Parliament, Rt. Hon. Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin would not comply with the Supreme Court ruling invalidating the Speaker’s pronouncement of four parliamentary seats vacant.
In a detailed and pointed statement, Hammed dissected the criticisms aimed at the Speaker, suggesting that they reveal underlying inconsistencies and double standards within the political and legal discourse.
“I struggle to understand what everyone means when they urge Speaker Bagbin to comply with the ruling of the Supreme Court. Is that to suggest that the Speaker has indicated his intentions not to comply with the ruling;
“Or is it a subtle admission that the Supreme Court did the wrong thing but the Speaker should be the bigger person? As far as I am concerned, the Speaker has done absolutely nothing to suggest he is not going to comply with the ruling”.
Abdul Hammed, a Member of the National Democratic Congress Communications Team
He noted that the New Patriotic Party (NPP), despite branding itself as a party that champions the rule of law, had failed to adhere to principles of consistency.
Abdul Hammed underscored that there is no existing law that designates specific seating arrangements for members in Parliament, pointing out that such practices are rooted in parliamentary convention rather than constitutional mandate. The NPP’s own legal arguments, he argued, have repeatedly emphasized the supremacy of the Constitution over conventions.
The opposition NDC’s Communicator further clarified that contrary to the narrative propagated by some political commentators, the Supreme Court ruling did not address seating arrangements within Parliament.
“The NDC MPs won’t be breaking any law if they choose to sit anywhere. The Supreme Court ruling was not about who sits where. This point is further strengthened by the fact that it is not the responsibility of the Speaker to arrange sitting places for the MPs. How then does a change in the sitting positions of the MPs incriminate the Speaker?”
Abdul Hammed, a Member of the National Democratic Congress Communications Team
Challenging the Majority Status: A Call for Legal Review
Abdul Hammed called for the NDC to revisit and potentially challenge the Speaker’s earlier declaration of the NPP as a “majority group,” a designation he described as legally unfounded.
He argued that the allegiance of an independent MP to the NPP does not equate to that member becoming part of the NPP, much like a football supporter cheering for a team does not become a supporter of that team permanently.
“What we have is a hung Parliament with equal numbers, with an independent candidate as a tie-breaker,” Hammed opined, urging a reconsideration of how parliamentary majority is defined and its accompanying privileges.
He highlighted that Speaker Bagbin’s recognition of the NPP as the majority group was a gesture aimed at fostering a collaborative and functional House. However, given the continued personal and institutional criticisms leveled against the Speaker, Hammed suggested it might be time for this gesture to be reconsidered.
“The lesson to us in the NDC is never to do the NPP any favours and never to trust them in any situation because they have shown on many occasions that they are not men and women of principle. Any man without principle is not a man at all.
“We have all seen how Jubilee House minions have flooded social media with what is purported to be the Speaker’s medical bills. As for the insults their communicators, Afenyo-Markin and KT Hammond have spewed on the person of the Speaker, I need not repeat them.”
Abdul Hammed, a Member of the National Democratic Congress Communications Team
Supreme Court Decisions and Parliamentary Practice
Additionally, Abdul Hammed pointed out the inherent contradiction in the criticisms Speaker Bagbin faces, juxtaposing the Supreme Court’s decision in the Justice Abdulai case—which requires 138 MPs present for parliamentary decisions—with the current situation.
He noted that the Speaker’s recent adjournments, due to a lack of quorum, were in strict adherence to this ruling, which only complicates the suggestion that the Speaker is flouting judicial directives.
“How can anyone suggest that complying with the ruling in Justice Abdulai means the Speaker is disobeying the ruling in Afenyo-Markin?” Abdul Hammed questioned, urging the public and political actors to focus on the real issue—ensuring that the majority caucus maintains full attendance to fulfill its legislative obligations.
Call for Strategic Firmness by the NDC
Abdul Hammed’s statement concluded with a rallying call for the NDC MPs to refrain from facilitating NPP-led legislative actions, especially as the government approaches the end of its term.
“If they had anything concrete to do to transform the country, they could have done it in the last 7 years and 10 months,” he argued, emphasizing that it is not the NDC’s role to ease the path for the NPP at this juncture.
He advocated for strict adherence to parliamentary rules and regulations to prevent further exploitation by the ruling New Patriotic Party caucus in Parliament.
READ ALSO: Okyeame Kwame Idolises David Dontoh for His Influence
