President Akufo-Addo’s decision not to act on the Anti-gay bill until a decision has been arrived by the Supreme Court, likewise Speaker Bagbin’s stance to discontinue the approval of the newly ministerial nominees pending a Supreme Court decision are in order.
Private legal practitioner Martin Luther Kpebu who made the assertion says both the President and the Speaker are speaking law when their positions are analysed beyond the face value.
According to the lawyer, the President’s position is not a “50-50” matter but rather something on the right path considering his criticism of the administration for some time now after realising the government has not been performing to expectation.
Although he initially described the development as a “tit-for-tat”, the lawyer says a deeper consideration of the matter suggests the President has not erred.
“Let’s not make it look like it’s just a tit for tat. I was one of the first persons to start saying tit for tat but that is on the face of it. There are various levels of analysis but when you go deeper, you find that that both the speaker and president are talking law which is that when a matter is in court, don’t do anything that renders the case nugatory. In simple terms don’t do anything that will make the case a foolish case. That’s a contempt of court,” he told Alfred Ocansey Saturday, March 23, 2024.
“So, in this case the President is right and he has my support 130%. When he says he is not signing to the anti-gay bill because the case is pending in the Supreme Court” explaining his incessant criticism of the President for his nonperformance “and so for me today to support the president then he really must be right. It’s not 50-50. If you ask me 1000 times, I’ll come back resoundingly in favour of the president not signing,” he added.
President Akufo-Addo has asked Parliament through his Executive Secretary, Nana Asante Bediatuo, not to transmit the Anti-LGBTQ bill to the Presidency for assent until two pending Supreme Court cases on the matter have been resolved.
In view of that, the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin, on Wednesday, March 20, 2024, said Parliament would not consider the ministerial nominees of President Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo until after the Supreme Court has finished hearing the suit against the appointees.
“In alignment with our constitutional mandates and the principles of good governance, it is essential for the President to adhere to the lawful course of action by accepting the transmission of the bill. Upon receipt, the President has the constitutionally provided options to assent to the bill, refuse it, or seek further consultation, as deemed necessary. As we move forward, it is the collective responsibility of all branches of government, and indeed all citizens, to uphold the constitution and ensure that our democratic practices are not only preserved but strengthened.
“The current impasse presents an opportunity for reflection and reaffirmation of our commitment to the principles of democracy, rule of law, and the unequivocal respect for the legislative process that forms the bedrock of our nation’s governance. I reiterate that the refusal to even accept the bill for consideration falls outside the legal bounds established by our constitutional framework. It is incumbent upon the President to accept the bill and take the necessary action within the prescribed constitutional limits, whether that action is assent, refusal, or referral to the Council of State for advice.
“Article 106(7) says ‘Where a bill passed by Parliament is presented to the President for assent, he shall signify within seven days after the presentation, to the Speaker that he assets to the bill or that he refuses to assent to bill, unless the bill has been referred by the President to the Council of State under article 90 of this Constitution’. The Parliament of Ghana will comply with the existing legal framework and reject the attempts by the Executive Secretary of the President, through his contemptuous letter, to instruct the Clerk to Parliament, an Officer of Parliament whose position is recognizably under the Constitution. We shall not cease and desist!
“Be that as it may, Hon Members, I also bring to your attention, the receipt of a process from the Courts titled Rockson-Nelson Etse K. Dafeamekpor vrs. The Speaker of Parliament and the Attorney -General ( Suit no. J1/12/2024) which process was served on the 19th of March 2024 and an injunction motion on notice seeking to restrain the Speaker from proceeding with the vetting and approval of the names of the persons submitted by His Excellency the President until the provisions of the constitution are satisfied.
“Hon. Members in the light of this process, the House is unable to continue to consider the nominations of His Excellency the President in the “spirit of upholding the rule of law “ until after the determination of the application for interlocutory injunction by the Supreme Court,” he said.
