-But Serving Under New Affiliation in the Same Term – Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has clarified that it is unconstitutional for Members of Parliament to lose their seats solely for leaving the party on whose ticket they were elected, but it has ruled that serving under a new party in the same term requires them to vacate their seats.
This clarification follows the Court’s ruling on Tuesday, November 12, 2024, which declared the Speaker of Parliament’s decision to vacate four parliamentary seats as unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court explained that while leaving a party does not immediately lead to the loss of an MP’s seat, taking active steps to join another party in Parliament during the same term and attempting to serve under that new affiliation requires the MP to vacate their seat.
“It follows from the above therefore, that the only plausible conclusion which must necessarily flow from a holistic and contextual reading of Article 97(1)(g) and (h) is that an MP’s seat shall be vacated upon departure from the cohort of his elected party in Parliament to join another party in Parliament while seeking to remain in that Parliament as a member of the new party,” the court held.
The court further clarified that the provisions of Article 97(1)(g) and (h) strictly apply to actions taken by an MP during their current term in Parliament. These provisions do not extend to future political plans, such as an MP deciding to contest under a different party ticket in subsequent elections.
“Consequently, Article 97(1)(g) and (h) must be understood within their contextual framework, with no implicit or explicit indication that they pertain to future electoral aspirations or intentions that would materialize in subsequent terms, such as an MP contesting under a different ticket in the next election cycle,” the court held.
The case revolves around Speaker Alban Bagbin’s decision to declare four parliamentary seats vacant, citing his interpretation of Article 97(1)(g) of the Ghanaian Constitution. This decision has sparked widespread legal and political debate.
Majority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin argued that the Speaker overstepped his authority by declaring the seats vacant without seeking judicial approval or providing the option for by-elections. In response, the Supreme Court issued an interim injunction to suspend the implementation of Bagbin’s decision while the case is resolved.
In an attempt to overturn the injunction, Speaker Bagbin filed an application challenging the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction.
His lawyer, Thaddeus Sory, argued that parliamentary decisions fall outside the Court’s authority and that judicial interference undermines the constitutional principle of separation of powers.
Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo rejected Speaker Bagbin’s application, affirming that the Supreme Court has the power to intervene when parliamentary actions are alleged to breach constitutional provisions.
She highlighted the importance of protecting constituents from losing representation, particularly with the December 7 general elections approaching, and emphasized that denying the possibility of by-elections could disenfranchise voters.
The ongoing dispute over Speaker Bagbin’s decision to declare four parliamentary seats vacant has had significant effects on government business and the economy. Legislative processes have been severely disrupted, with key bills and policies delayed due to the uncertainty in Parliament. This has intensified the already delicate balance of power in a hung Parliament, making it difficult to achieve consensus on crucial economic matters.
The delays have particularly affected the passage of bills tied to fiscal reforms and revenue generation, essential to stabilizing Ghana’s economy. The looming December 2025 budget is at risk of not being approved on time, a situation that could undermine the country’s commitments under the IMF program and disrupt debt restructuring plans.
Businesses and economic analysts have raised concerns that the deadlock is dampening investor confidence and slowing the decision-making processes needed to address inflation and currency depreciation.
Beyond the economic impacts, many are also questioning when Parliament will reconvene to address these pressing issues, as no clear timeline has been provided for its resumption.
With the general elections approaching, there is mounting pressure on the leadership to resolve this impasse quickly. Failure to do so could have far-reaching implications for governance, economic recovery, and public confidence in the democratic process.
