Tamale South lawmaker, Haruna Iddrisu, is questioning the locus of the Secretary to the President in writing to Parliament to desist from transmitting the Anti-LGBTQ Bill for Executive assent.
According to the lawyer, the President’s Secretary politically lacks the mandate to make such orders to the Legislative arm of government whose powers are enshrined in Article 93 of the 1992 Constitution.
His comment comes on the back of a letter written to the Clerk of Parliament by the Executive Secretary to the President, Nana Bediatuo Asante, requesting Parliament to desist from transmitting the controversial Anti-Gay Bill to the President for assent.
Addressing the media in Parliament Tuesday, March 19, 2024, the former Minority Leader indicated that it is the President himself, who, per the Standing Orders of Parliament, can write to the Speaker directly.
He asked the Clerk of Parliament to disregard the directive since it lacks merit.
“Politically, what power does the President’s Secretary have writing to the Clerk of Parliament and not the President himself writing directly to the Speaker of Parliament as is required of our Standing Order so that officially this can be read as communication from the President? So ideally, this paper means nothing and should be ignored by the Clerk because communications to Parliament must be communications signed by the President, addressed to the Speaker of Parliament as is provided by our Standing Orders, whether old or new,” he sated.
Mr. Iddrisu continued that even though the matter is in court, “an attempt to seek an injunction is not the same thing as an injunction even if it is an interlocutory injunction. But more importantly, Parliament cannot be injuncted not to perform its lawful function as the Legislature of Ghana clothed under Article 93.”
Background
The Office of the President, pending two Supreme Court applications, asked the House of Parliament to refrain from submitting the Anti-LGBTQ/Gay bill to the Presidency for assent.
The order followed an allegation from the Presidency that Parliament attempted submitting the Bill to the Office for the President to sign.
The Presidency says until the reliefs in the two matters are interpreted by the apex court, the President cannot take a decision on the bill.
The applications seek to prevent Parliament from sending the Bill to the President and to restrain the President from signifying his assent to it, pending the final determination of the matter.
In a statement issued by the Secretary to the President Monday, March 18, 2024, Nana Bediatuo Asante, indicated that, Parliament was aware of the two applications since it was served in both instances, and submitting the document for approval or otherwise was not appropriate.
“It is the understanding of this Office that both applications have also been duly served on Parliament. Therefore, it would be improper for you to transmit the Bill to the President and equally improper for this Office to receive the Bill until the Supreme Court determines the matters raised in the suits,” the statement said in some parts.
It added that the Attorney-General also advised the President not to take any action concerning the Bill until the issues raised by the suits are resolved by the Supreme Court.
The Office further stated that it is established law that during the pendency of an interlocutory injunction application, the status quo ante should be maintained, and no action should be taken that could prejudice the injunctive relief sought and undermine the authority of the court.
“In the circumstances, you are kindly requested to cease and desist from transmitting the Bill to the President until the matters before the Supreme Court are resolved,” it added.
