A private legal practitioner, Julius Opoku Agyei, has weighed in on the escalating tensions in Parliament over the Supreme Court’s stay of the Speaker’s decision to declare four parliamentary seats vacant.
Mr Opoku Agyei attributed the ongoing disruptions to the actions of National Democratic Congress (NDC) Members of Parliament.
In an interview on JoyNews The Law on Sunday, November 10, he noted that “NDC MPs have made it difficult for the four affected Members of Parliament to enter the chamber,” further complicating the enforcement of the Supreme Court’s order.
He further stated that the Speaker has not stopped the four MPs from coming to Parliament, so he cannot be accused of contempt of court.
Mr Opoku Agyei added that the Speaker’s recent attempt to have the Supreme Court vacate its order demonstrated his acknowledgment of the ruling and a willingness to comply, in contrast to any direct defiance.
“The Speaker could have ignored the order but chose instead to seek the Court’s judgment, which shows he recognises the authority of the order,” he added.
However, the analyst argued that, as Speaker, he holds authority over the conduct within Parliament, and therefore has a degree of responsibility to prevent disruptions that impede the Court’s order.
“If you see that certain MPs under your control are acting in ways that block the enforcement of the Supreme Court’s decision, you become a party to it,” he explained.
The issue arose following the Speaker’s announcement declaring four seats vacant, a decision promptly stayed by the Supreme Court. Despite this order, Parliamentary sessions have since adjourned twice without a quorum due to the absence of these MPs.
NPP MPs have claimed that NDC members are intentionally obstructing the four from entering the chamber, which, they argue, effectively disregards the Court’s decision.
He also threatened to cite the Speaker of contempt, accusing him of siding with the NDC MPs.
As Parliament remains deadlocked and compliance with the Supreme Court order continues to be debated, many are questioning the political and legal ramifications of this dispute.