The Supreme Court has dismissed the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin’s appeal for Justice Gaewu to recuse himself for being an NPP member, stating it did not meet the requirements necessary for review.
“We are of the view that the application for review does not meet the threshold required for its grant,” the Court remarked in its decision in a hearing today.
“The application is therefore dismissed.”
The court explained that reasons to this decision will be made available to the public.
“Full reasons for our decision will be filed in the registry of this court by Friday, 8th November, 2024.”
Background
Lawyers for the Speaker of Parliament have called for Supreme Court Judge, Justice Gaewu to recuse himself from the case in relation to the Speaker’s declaration of some seats vacant.
Thaddeus Sory in court on Wednesday, October 30 argued that the said Justice had once affiliated with the NPP by contesting as an MP on the ticket of the party in the Volta Region, thus cannot be a Judge in the case.
“He was known to be associated with New Patriotic Party (NPP) and in fact he was a parliamentary candidate in one of their constituencies in the Volta Region,” Thaddeus Sory argued.
This development falls on the back of Speaker Bagbin’s controversial declaration of four seats in parliamentary vacant.
The Supreme Court placed the declaration on halt, an action which was in response to a motion filed by New Patriotic Party (NPP) Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin.
Bagbin, challenging the ruling, argued that the Supreme Court overstepped by intervening in what he claims is a “non-judicial decision” since Parliament is not within the judiciary’s jurisdiction.
His legal team, led by Thaddeus Sory, contended that the court’s ruling misapplied the law by pausing a decision that, according to them, falls strictly within the legislative sphere.
Bagbin’s appeal also sought to strike out Afenyo-Markin’s writ, which he argued improperly restricted his authority as Speaker.
According to his legal stance, Parliament operates independently of the judicial hierarchy, with Bagbin asserting, “The Supreme Court’s powers, under the 1992 Constitution, to stay execution of rulings are limited to judicial bodies and not applicable to the Speaker of Parliament.”
He maintained that the ruling affects the autonomy of legislative decisions, further deepening the case’s constitutional implications.
The Supreme Court has therefore begun hearing the suit filed by Speaker Bagbin for the Apex Court to vacate its ruling of a stay of execution on the Speaker’s declaration on the four seats.
More details to follow.
