<\/p>\n
Beatrice Annan, Deputy Spokesperson for the John Mahama Campaign, has sharply criticized the Supreme Court\u2019s decision overturning Speaker Alban Bagbin\u2019s declaration of four parliamentary seats as vacant.<\/p>\n
Annan accused the Supreme Court, under Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, of aligning with the New Patriotic Party (NPP), asserting that the ruling would not stand the test of time and would be viewed unfavourably in the future.<\/p>\n
Speaking on The Big Issue<\/em><\/strong> with Selorm Adonoo on Channel One TV, she argued that the Supreme Court missed a crucial opportunity to strengthen and uphold Ghana\u2019s democratic principles.<\/p>\n \u201c[Ruling] it gives credence to the perception that this Court [Supreme] and the Torkornoo [Chief Justice Her Ladyship Gertrude Torkornoo] led court is only interested in doing the political bidding of the NPP. I think that once again, the Supreme Court missed a golden opportunity to uphold and advance our democracy. And they missed one of the greatest opportunities that will consolidate our democratic gains. What we have is not beautiful.\u201d<\/p>\n She argued that the Supreme Court failed in its attempt to justify the outcome desired by the executive.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cThey didn\u2019t do the country proud, I think that if lawyers in other jurisdictions and common law in other jurisdictions take this decision, I\u2019m clear in their minds that anybody would come to one conclusion that the executive wanted a particular outcome. And the judges struggled to justify that outcome. And you could see from when they wanted to go on the tangent of purposive interpretations.\u201d<\/p>\n However, in a sharp rebuttal, the Member of Parliament for Abuakwa South, Samuel Atta-Akyea, who was also a panel member on Channel One TV\u2019s political show dismissed her claims, labelling them as \u201cdistasteful\u201d.<\/p>\n He asserted that the rule of law prevailed.<\/p>\n On Tuesday, November 12, the Supreme Court overturned Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin\u2019s decision to declare four parliamentary seats vacant, ruling in favour of a challenge brought by Majority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin.<\/p>\n In its detailed judgment released on Thursday, November 14, The five justices who sided with the Majority Leader clarified that a parliamentary seat can only be declared vacant if a lawmaker switches political parties while retaining their position in Parliament.<\/p>\n The ruling further stated that the Speaker\u2019s decision could not take effect within the current parliamentary term.<\/p>\n However, two dissenting justices argued that the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the case, highlighting a divide in the interpretation of the Court\u2019s authority on such matters.<\/p>\n Vacant seats: Reasons why two Supreme Court Justices dissented<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n