The Majority in Parliament has accused the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) of destroying everything needed to build good governance in Ghana’s democratic dispensation.
According to the Caucus, anytime a court decision goes in favour of the NDC it rejoices and praises democratic rule but whenever a decision goes against its wishes, the NDC and its party officials turn to scandalize the courts.
Deputy Majority leader, Alexander Afenyo-Nyarko, made the accusation when he addressed the media in Parliament on the ruling of the Supreme Court on the right of Deputy Speakers to vote while presiding.
The NDC, he said, is arguing that although the Deputy Speakers have not been specifically prohibited from voting, but by parity of reasoning, once Mr. Speaker has been prohibited when presiding, the Deputy Speakers should also be denied the right to vote.
The Deputy leader argued that in 2015 the Supreme Court delivered a landmark decision in a case where the then Minority NPP contested the right of officials of the Ghana Highway Authority, as public office holders, to vie for positions in the NDC because that amounted to a breach of Article 94.
According to him, the NPP argued its position in the public space and then proceeded to the Supreme Court.
The Apex court, he said, ruled in a 7-0 unanimous decision that Article 94 (3) (b) was specific on the category of public servants that are prohibited and ineligible to be members of Parliament and therefore they could not include officials of the Highway Authority to the list outlined by the Constitution.
Mr. Afenyo-Markin argued it is the same principle that has found its way into the ruling of the Supreme Court on the Deputy Speakers.
He said, “The then-Deputy Attorney-General, Dr. Ayine opposed me in court and his view was that if the Constitution had intended to include GES staff, Ghana Health Service Staff, Ghana Highway Authority Staff, it would have said so.”
“We accepted the decision but we did not scandalize the courts.”
According to him, the NDC is engaged in a two-sided argument and stressed the opposition cannot approbate and reprobate and added, “You cannot when you are in government argue because conveniently it goes for you but today you want to say that decision should change.”
The Afenyo-Markin challenged the NDC to graciously accept the ruling and respect the bench and the court as members of the political class.
He argued it is the only way of sustaining Ghana’s democracy and warned, “But if they continue to go on and on and say that if it is against them they will attack and they will throw caution to the wind then I beg to say they will ambush our own fortunes in our path to good governance.”
Majority leader Osei Kyei-Mensa-Bonsu in his remark argued Speakers of Parliament are not entitled to vote because they don’t represent constituents but stressed Deputy Speakers do represent constituencies and constituents that is why they can vote.
According to him, when it comes to decisions Article 104(1) is ultimate and provides that matters in Parliament shall be determined by the votes of the majority of members present and voting with at least half of all the members of Parliament present.
“Why is Article 104(1) providing some exceptions? There are instances where you require two sets of members to be present to support a vote. For instance, censure vote as it relates to the speaker. If you want to remove the speaker, you don’t require one-half,” he stated.
The Majority leader argued the ruling of the Supreme Court was not to satisfy the government in order to approve the E-levy.
He stressed it does not relate to E-levy but to truth and constitutionality of whether or not a speaker can vote and is entitled to vote.
Source: Mypublisher24.com
