Member of Parliament (MP) Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor has accused Attorney-General (A-G) Godfred Dame of abusing his discretionary powers in the case that is seeking to come to President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo to receive the anti-lgbtqi bill.
This was after the A-G, on Tuesday, April 9, prayed for the High Court to adjourn to April 18 for him to argue his case against the application.
In the view of Mr Dafeamekpor, the A-G who filed for expeditious hearing in the earlier case that was against Parlaiment’s consideration of the new ministers, should have also been prepared for a speedy gearing of the case compelling the president to receive the bill.
Speaking on the Ghana Tonight show on TV3 Thursday April 11, the opposition lawmaker said “The Attorney-General failed to file anything in opposition which is technically called an affidavit in opposition. But they came to court to say that even though they have not filed an affidavit in opposition they intend to argue against the application strictly on matters of law. and so we were hoping that we could have proceeded to do that but then he asked for a date, 18th of April for us to come back.
“What is surprising is that you have an AG, who by some strange privileged position can get the Supreme Court to hear a matter a day or two after the motion on notice has been filed and served on him when the motion technically could not be shared until after 14 days when the processes have been served on all the respondent inclduing myself, the plaintiffs and the speaker as the 1st respondent in the matter if any process is served at all, but he got that done and yet he comes to a high court and prays for time to to be able to argue a matter on grounds of law.
“It tells you the abuse of office, abuse of discretionary powers, and abuse of privilege because the A-G is the head of the bar, and by our practice any time the A-G appears in court he is given preferential treatment by our practice in the court, his cases are heared first so that he can quickly be done with and return to his office to handle other matters of state.”
An Accra High Court had granted Mr Dafeamekpor’s expedited hearing motion application that is seeking to compel President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo to accept and assent to or otherwise, the Human Rights and Family Values Bill 2024.
the Legislator had maintained that the case had “important constitutional considerations and must receive urgent attention.”
TV3’s Legal Affairs Correspondent Joseph Ackah-Blay, who was in court for the hearing on Tuesday, April 9 reported that representatives from the Attorney-General’s office did not oppose the motion.
Ackah-Blay further reported that once the motion was granted, the court asked the lawyers for the South Dayi MP to move the motion.
The application seeks to first allow Parliament to transmit the anti-LGBTQ bill to the Presdident and secondly, for the President to accept the bill and to either assent to it or communicate his reasons for not assenting to Parliament in seven days as the position of the constitution.
The lawyers for the MP further argued that once Parliament has duly passed such laws, the President cannot hide behind any “supposed pending case to decide” whether to accept the bill or not.
They maintained that the President cannot dictate how Parliament should do its job.
Supreme Court dismisses injunction application against approval of ministerial nominees
Background
Mr Dafeamekpor on March 25 filed a new application at the High Court to compel the Speaker of Parliament to submit Anti-LGBT bill to the President within 7 days.
The Plaintiff is also asking the Court to compel the President to accept the bill and either sign or indicate to Parliament he cannot assent within the same period.
He filed this motion on the grounds that the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill has been duly passed by the Parliament of Ghana in compliance with Article 106 (1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana.
Plaintiff further argued that the Bill “must be transmitted to and received by the President of Ghana for assent or otherwise in accordance with Article 106 (7) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana.”
According to EIB Network Legal Affairs Correspondent, Murtala Inusah, an application for Mandamus is a request to a Court asking it to compel or order a government official to properly fulfill their official duties or correct an abuse of discretion.
Below are the reliefs being sought by the Plaintiff in his application for Mandamus
I. A declaration that the Parliament of Ghana duly complied with all the Constitutional provisions stipulated in Article 106 (1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana in the passage of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill on the 28th of February, 2024.
II. An Order of mandamus directed at the 1st Respondent herein to present the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill to the President of the Republic of Ghana herein in accordance with Article 106 (7) of the 1992 Republic Constitution of Ghana on the basis that the Parliament of Ghana has duly complied with all the Constitutional provisions stipulated under Article 106 (1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana.
III. An Order directed at the President of Ghana to receive the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill as presented by Parliament in accordance with Article 106 (7) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana for the purposes of his assent or otherwise.
IV. An Order directed at the President of the Republic of Ghana to signify to the 1st Respondent herein, within seven days after the presentation of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, his assent to the Bill or that he refuses to assent to the bill in accordance with Article 106 (7) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana unless the Bill is referred by the President to the Council of State pursuant to Article 90 of the Constitution of Ghana.