Plaintiff disappointed in ‘division’ created by SC ruling on Deputy Speakers

Former President Mahama and President Akufo-Addo
Google search engine

The plaintiff in the case that sought Supreme Court’s interpretation of Articles 102 and 104 of the 1992 Constitution on the right of Deputy Speakers of Parliament to vote even when they preside over a sitting says the mixed reaction is not what he expected.

Law lecturer Justice Abdulai said he expected the judgement to have been greeted with more acceptance and settled matters once and for all.

Wednesday’s judgement delivered by Justice Jones Dotse, who presided over a seven-member panel, has divided opinions.

Even the two major political actors in Ghana – President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo and former President John Dramani Mahama – have expressed varying opinions about the judgement.

While the incumbent backs the judgement, the past president is shocked and says it will lead Parliament into an “absurdity” in future.

But speaking on The Keypoints on TV3/3FM on Saturday, March 12, Justice Abdulai said: “The recent outbursts from the two presidents and the Speaker also joining the fray, it clearly [shows] things are not as I expected.”

He said the division has made “me feel I lost part of the reason I had to go to the Supreme Court”.

The legal practitioner of almost a decade of experience has been urged to seek review of the judgement despite a 7-0 unanimous outcome.

He disclosed that if he has to seek review, it will not by the persuasion of any person but will be done based on the written judgement he reads for himself.

In any case, he indicated, “the idea of a review is not a mathematical arithmetic. The idea of a review is clearly based on the law”.

By Emmanuel Kwame Amoh||Ghana

Google search engine