Supreme Court Dismisses Review On Ruling On Deputy Speaker’s Voting Rights

The Supreme Court has in a unanimous decision, dismissed a case filed by private legal practitioner Justice Abdulai asking the court to review its March 9, judgment in which the court dangerously ruled that a Deputy Speaker Presiding on parliamentary proceedings can vote in the same proceeding.

The unanimous panel comprised Justices Dotse, Nene Amegatcher, Prof Ashie Kotey, Lovelace Johnson, Mariama Owusu, Clemence Honyenuga, Gertrude Torkonoo, Prof. Mensah Bonsu, Emmanuel Kulendi.

Mr. Abdulai had urged the court to set aside its decision insisting it had occasioned a miscarriage of justice.

But the State, represented by Deputy Attorney General Diana Asonaba disagreed with this view.

She told the court its review decision was limited to correcting an obvious error and drawing the court’s attention to matters that were not available to it or could not have been found.

“The long reference to previous constitutions does not meet the criteria for a review application. The plaintiff has failed to show how a miscarriage of justice has occasioned or showed any new matter that should have been considered. The present application is unmeritorious and a clear abuse of the court process”, she said.

It would be recalled that the controversial judgment by the court has been pointed out as a coup d’état against the legislature by the judiciary noted for its partisanship and corruption.

This subversion of the legislature made it possible for the approval of the 2022 budget by a one-sided parliament made up of majority MPs to carry.

The ruling breached an important judicial precedent in which a past Supreme Court had refused to rule on a matter pertaining to parliament’s inner workings because it deemed it to be interference in the affairs of parliament.

Among persons who had expressed worry was the Speaker of Parliament, Rt. Hon. Alban Bagbin who had encouraged the petitioner to file for a review.

The Court presided over by Justice Jones Dotse dismissed the application saying it had failed to meet the threshold required for a review case to succeed.