The political climate in Ghana has grown increasingly contentious in recent weeks, particularly following the Supreme Court’s ruling that overturned a prior decision by the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, to declare four parliamentary seats vacant.
This incident has spotlighted the ongoing struggle between the majority and minority parties in the legislature, deepening divisions within the government and prompting discussions about the nature of parliamentary supremacy in the country.
Initially, Speaker Bagbin’s declaration stemmed from a perceived failure of the affected MPs to fulfil their parliamentary duties, prompting widespread concern about potential disruptions to legislative processes.
The ruling sent shockwaves through the political landscape, with NPP MPs arguing that it undermined democratic principles and could set a dangerous precedent. Following this, the Supreme Court intervened, asserting that the Speaker had overstepped his authority, leading to a restoration of the MPs’ positions.
Political analysts have weighed in on this dramatic turn of events, with Dr. Joshua Jebuntie Zaato, a political scientist at the University of Ghana, highlighting the constitutional underpinnings of Ghana’s political system.
“We do not practice parliamentary supremacy in Ghana. Ultimate power does not lie with parliament; it lies with the constitution,” he stated on TV3’s Key Points monitored by MyNewsGH.con
His remarks encapsulate the tension between parliamentary authority and constitutional governance, a crucial aspect of Ghana’s political framework that is often contested.
The ruling has not only reestablished the status quo but has also intensified the ongoing rivalry between the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and the New Patriotic Party (NPP).
The NPP’s vocal opposition to the Speaker’s actions, viewed as a breach of protocol, has galvanized their base and rekindled debates about the integrity and accountability of parliamentary procedures.
