Citing an injunction filed by Hon. Nelson Dafeamekpor at the Supreme Court against the vetting and approval of the Ministers, Speaker of the Parliament Alban Bagbin has taken an unusual step by putting the vetting and approval of a list of ministers presented to Parliament by President Nana Akufo-Addo on hold.
The Speaker clarified that he cannot move further with the procedures as he has been properly served with the injunction motion that aims to prevent him from reviewing and approving the names of ministers-designate that have been submitted to him.
The President rejected the anti-gay bill that was forwarded to him for his approval since it was the subject of an ongoing lawsuit at the Supreme Court. This decision is perceived as retaliation on the part of the Speaker.
We're now on WhatsApp. Click here to join.
Using his Executive Secretary, the Speaker chastised the Presidency on Wednesday for rejecting a bill that had been given to him and trying to tell Parliament how to do its business. The Speaker vowed to uphold the law instead of bowing to the Presidency’s demands.
“The Ghanaian Parliament will uphold the current legal system and reject the President’s Executive Secretary’s discourteous letter attempting to direct the Clerk to Parliament, a Parliamentary officer whose post is clearly defined by the Constitution. We won’t give up or stop! He gave lawmakers his word.
He then told them that he had decided to stay on after receiving clearance from President Akufo-Addo’s ministers.
However, I also want to draw your attention, Honourable Members, to the fact that the Courts have received a procedure named Rockson-Nelson Etse K. Dafeamekpor vrs. An injunction motion on notice was filed by the Attorney General and the Speaker of Parliament (Suit No. J1/12/2024), which was served on March 19, 2024. The motion seeks to prevent the Speaker from approving and screening the names of the individuals that His Excellency the President has submitted until the provisions of the constitution are met.
There is a perception that the Speaker was pressured into making this choice by the Executive Branch of the Presidency, despite the fact that the public’s response to the Speaker’s decision has been divided.
