Evans Mawunyo Tsikata: Parliamentary procedure vs. Partisan politics

The Minority in Ghana’s Parliament has per an action initiated by its former leader, Haruna Iddrisu, petitioned the Speaker to declare four parliamentary seats vacant under Article 97(1)(g) of the Constitution.

This provision states that an MP shall vacate their seat if they leave the party they were elected under or seek to remain in Parliament as an independent candidate.

However, there are several legal and procedural concerns with the Minority’s actions that raise questions about the merits of their referrals.

Article 97(1)(g) of the Ghanaian Constitution is clear and unambiguous in its language. It states that an MP shall vacate their seat if they leave the party they were elected under or seek to remain in Parliament as an independent candidate.

This leaves minimal room for legal maneuvering, as the Speaker’s role is to apply the law, not interpret it. The constitutional provision is straightforward, and the Speaker is bound to follow it.

In 2020, then-Speaker of Parliament, Professor Mike Oquaye, declared the Fomena Parliamentary seat vacant when the New Patriotic Party (NPP) MP contested as an independent candidate.

This set a clear precedent for the Speaker’s authority to make such declarations based on the constitutional provision. The Minority’s petition now must be considered within this established legal framework, which reinforces the Speaker’s powers in this regard.

The Minority’s petition was filed as a diversion from critical national issues like traffic safety, environmental deterioration, and economic hardship. With Ghana’s December 7 elections approaching, Haruna Iddrisu’s concentration on this motion is misplaced, especially considering its minor impact on election results.

The Speaker, as a neutral arbiter, has a constitutional obligation to uphold the principle of audi alteram partem (hearing the other side) before making a decision. Failure to do so would damage the proceedings’ fairness and credibility, potentially having far-reaching consequences for Ghana’s democratic institutions.

Most Ghanaian political parties, including the NPP, have internal rules prohibiting members from contesting against the party’s official candidates. In such cases, expulsion from the party is a possible consequence.

The Speaker must consider the implications of these party rules when evaluating the Minority’s petition, as they form part of the broader legal and political context.

Established parliamentary procedures for declaring a seat vacant must be strictly followed. The Speaker’s role is to ensure that these procedures are upheld, rather than making decisions based on political considerations.

Deviating from these established processes could undermine the integrity of the legislative process.

If the Speaker were to declare the seats vacant based on the Minority’s petition, it could lead to legal challenges and further political tensions.

The affected MPs or their parties may seek judicial intervention to challenge the Speaker’s decision, potentially resulting in protracted legal battles. This could undermine the stability and credibility of Ghana’s legislative process, and divert attention from other pressing national issues.

Considering the above arguments, the Minority’s referrals of the four MPs may be viewed as a waste of time and resources.

The constitutional provision is clear, and precedent supports the Speaker’s authority to make such declarations. The Minority’s actions appear to be politically motivated rather than grounded in legal merit, and they risk undermining the fairness and legitimacy of parliamentary proceedings.