3 months ago
15 ARTICLE AD
THE sitting of the Appointments Committee of Parliament was yesterday marked by disorder and confusion for more than two hours when it convened to consider two nominees to the Supreme Court.
It took a vote to clear the path for the vetting to proceed after a motion to arrest the process was lost by 7:7 vote pursuant to provisions of Article 104(3) of the 1992 Constitution which provides that “where the votes on any motion is equal, it shall be taken to be lost”.
It was the second time the sitting of the Committee was broiled in controversy since the nomination of Justice Sophia Rosseta Bernasko Essah, a Court of Appeal judge and Professor Richard Frimpong Oppong, an academic, was referred to it by the Speaker, Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin.
The last time the Committee met on the nominees, sitting ended abruptly as the Minority side on the committee accused their colleagues of convening the meeting on their blind side.
When the committee reconvened yesterday to consider the nomination of Justice Rosetta Essah, Bawku Central MP, Mahama Ayariga, raised a preliminary argument that the long-standing mode of appointment to the Supreme Court to exceed 10 has been unconstitutional.
Citing Article 144(1) of the 1992 Constitution which says “the Supreme Court shall consist of the Chief Justice and not less than nine other Justices of the Supreme Court,” Mahama Ayariga said having more than the stipulated numbers at the Court was inconsistent with the Constitution and prayed the committee to adjourn, notify plenary of the observations and a decision taken going forward.
“The legal issue I’m raising before this committee which should be captured in our report for discussion is that whereas the Constitution in Act 144 says the President can appoint the justices, there is nowhere in this Constitution that the President is given the power to increase the number beyond the nine plus one,” he argued.
The President in his letter to the Speaker on the nominations entreated the House to approve of the nominations in order to “achieve the full compliment of the Court for the next legal year”.
That determination of a full compliment, Mr Ayariga said, could not be determined by the President as the Constitution is clear on how many justices could be on the bench of the apex court.
His preposition was supported by former majority leader and MP for Zebilla, Cletus Avoka, Minority Chief Whip, Kwame Agbodza and other minority MPs on the committee.
Leading the opposition to the motion, the Majority Chief Whip and MP for Nsawam-Adoagyiri, Frank Annoh-Dompreh, said the move appeared to be in bad faith because during all engagements before the sitting, the issues did not come up.
“However, we all have our views on interpreting the constitution and one person’s interpretation cannot be an authority and we are not clothed with the powers to interpret the constitution. We have been mandated by the Speaker based on a referral…” he argued and asked that the motion be dismissed.
The opposition was backed by the Vice Chairman of the Committee and MP for Asokwa, Patricia Appiagyei, who was acting in the stead of the chairman, MP for Abuakwa North, Gifty Twum-Ampofo and other majority MPs leading to a deadlock.
As a result, the meeting was suspended for half an hour for consultations in conclave but an amicable solution could not be reached on the matter.
When the committee resumed from the recess, the acting chair in her ruling dismissed the motion and directed the vetting continued but the minority rejected the ruling, revealing that same was obtained from the Facebook wall of a journalist who had posted the opinion even before the committee went on suspension; accusing the chair of plagiarism.
Things got to a head at this point as the Deputy Minority Leader and MP for Ellembele, Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah, rose to his feet and said the process would not continue if the vote was not taken.
The intervention of the Majority Leader, Alexander Afenyo-Markin who is an ex-officio member of the Committee brought some calm and paved the way for a vote and subsequently the vetting of Justice Sophia Rosseta Bernasko Essah which lasted barely an hour, where her credentials, opinions, education amongst others were vetted.
BY JULIUS YAO PETETSI
