A United States Ghanaian Professor Kwaku Asare has said that the framers of the constitution clearly designated the High Court as the appropriate forum for resolving disputes about vacating seats, not the Supreme Court.
Further, he said appellate review (the power that a higher court has to examine decisions of lower courts) is left to the court of appeal, not the Supreme Court.
He argues that the high court, with its specialized mandate, is better suited for such matters, while the Supreme Court’s role is reserved for broader constitutional issues.
“The Supreme Court has no role in these matters as the Court articulated in the Wulensi matter. When the Supreme Court oversteps and takes on cases meant for the high court, it risks undermining the constitutional order and appearing to engage in political matters. Such overreach disrupts the balance of powers and weakens public confidence in the judiciary’s impartiality. By adhering to Article 99, and allowing the high court to handle these issues, we protect both the integrity of the judicial system and the peace of the nation,” Prof Arae, also a private legal practitioner wrote on his Facebook in reaction to the Supreme Court ruling that stayed execution of the ruling of the S[weaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin declaring four seats vacant.
A United States Ghanaian Professor Kwaku Asare has said that the framers of the constitution clearly designated the High Court as the appropriate forum for resolving disputes about vacating seats, not the Supreme Court.
Further, he said appellate review (the power that a higher court has to examine decisions of lower courts) is left to the court of appeal, not the Supreme Court.
He argues that the high court, with its specialized mandate, is better suited for such matters, while the Supreme Court’s role is reserved for broader constitutional issues.
“The Supreme Court has no role in these matters as the Court articulated in the Wulensi matter. When the Supreme Court oversteps and takes on cases meant for the high court, it risks undermining the constitutional order and appearing to engage in political matters. Such overreach disrupts the balance of powers and weakens public confidence in the judiciary’s impartiality. By adhering to Article 99, and allowing the high court to handle these issues, we protect both the integrity of the judicial system and the peace of the nation,” Prof Arae, also a private legal practitioner wrote on his Facebook in reaction to the Supreme Court ruling that stayed execution of the ruling of the S[weaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin declaring four seats vacant.
The Supreme Court on Friday, October 18 directed Parliament to recognise and allow the four MPs to continue to serve as lawmakers until the case is determined. This was after the Speaker had, on Thursday, October 17, declared four seats in Parliament vacant.
The constituencies and the lawmakers are:
1. Cynthia Morrison, the current NPP MP for Agona West constituency in the Central Region, who has filed to run as an independent candidate.
2. Kwadwo Asante, the current NPP MP for the Suhum constituency in the Eastern Region, who has also filed to run as an independent candidate.
3. Andrew Asiamah Amoako, currently an independent MP for the Fomena constituency in the Ashanti Region, who has filed to run in the upcoming election as a candidate for the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP).
4. Peter Kwakye Ackah (Amenfi Central), NDC.
The former Minority Leader Haruna Iddrisu had petitioned the Speaker to declare the seats vacant by invoking Article 97 (1)(g) of the Constitution which stipulates that a lawmaker must vacate their seat if they leave the party under which they were elected or attempt to remain in Parliament as an independent candidate.
The Majority Leader Afenyo-Markin had filed a suit at the Supreme Court against the petition filed by Haruna Iddrisu.
But the National Democratic Congress (NDC) lawmakers said they would stick to the ruling of the speaker declaring four seats vacant, a ruling that makes them the Majority in Parliament.
Addressing a press conference in Parliament on Sunday, October 20, leader of the NDC lawmakers, Dr Cassiel Ato Foprson said that “We will jealously protect our new Majority status and will not bow, retreat nor surrender our lawfully earned status. We will also not abdicate our responsibility to the people no matter what! Nothing, absolutely nothing, will change this position! We are fortified that the ‘proceedings’ of Parliament ‘shall not’ be ‘impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament.’ Any interference with the business of Parliament is unlawful, unacceptable and shall be resisted. We have never hidden our position that we are in this Parliament for the ordinary Ghanaian.”
Prof Asare in his post said “Peace must rest on two principles articulated by GOGO in 2020. First, the question of vacating parliamentary seats is a legal matter, not a political one, and therefore must be resolved by the courts rather than by political actors. Second, the appropriate forum for addressing these issues is the high court, not the Supreme Court. Peace in a democratic society is built on respect for the rule of law and the clear separation of powers. The two principles provide a clear framework for resolving questions about whether a parliamentary seat has become vacant, in a way that upholds justice and preserves social order. These principles are essential for ensuring peace that lasts, grounded in fairness and institutional integrity.
“The first principle highlights that questions about vacating seats are inherently juridical, not political. This distinction prevents political actors from exploiting such matters for partisan gain or distorting the democratic process. In 2020, GOGO emphasized that these disputes must be resolved through established legal frameworks, ensuring impartiality and justice over political expediency. This approach strengthens trust in both the political system and democratic institutions. GOGO predicted that “if you leave it to politicians, it is going to become partisan because if you have a Speaker who is NPP inclined, he will use his power to vacate the seat of NDC members and vice versa.”
“The second principle focuses on proper jurisdiction. The framers of the constitution, through Article 99, clearly designated the high court as the appropriate forum for resolving disputes about vacating seats. Further, appellate review is left to the court of appeal, not the Supreme Court. The high court, with its specialized mandate, is better suited for such matters, while the Supreme Court’s role is reserved for broader constitutional issues. The Supreme Court has no role in these matters as the Court articulated in the Wulensi matter. When the Supreme Court oversteps and takes on cases meant for the high court, it risks undermining the constitutional order and appearing to engage in political matters. Such overreach disrupts the balance of powers and weakens public confidence in the judiciary’s impartiality. By adhering to Article 99, and allowing the high court to handle these issues, we protect both the integrity of the judicial system and the peace of the nation.”
