Kwame Akuffo on the Ruling of Vacant Seats: Supreme Court Wrongly Missing in Action

The current debate on the recent application for a stay of execution before the Supreme Court filed by the Majority Leader, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, after a declaration of four parliamentary seats as vacant by Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin, has taken an interesting turn from leading lawyer Kwame Akuffo through a thought-provoking opinion piece. Akuffo criticized the Supreme Court, showing that at the core of this case lay fundamental legal and procedural inconsistencies.

One of Akuffo's main concerns is basically, the nature of the stay-of-execution application itself. He feels such applications are usually for matters involving a court judgment or enforceable order- neither of which applies to the Speaker's ruling. "A party cannot seek an application for a stay of execution in respect of a matter which is not a judgment or a Court order," Akuffo says, considering the application to be legally problematic. This confusion raises questions as to the legal basis for the relief sought by Afenyo-Markin.

Akuffo also raises a very important issue regarding the timing of the application. He states that it was upon an expectation founded on antecedent facts that no more existed after the Speaker had so declared and therefore, the cause of action upon which the applicant went to Court had long been superseded by the conduct of the Speaker. He explained that by the time the writ was filed, it was not consistent with the prevailing legal scenario.

On the contrary, Akuffo attacks the assumption of jurisdiction by the Court in view of Article 99 of the Ghanaian Constitution, which handles parliamentary seat disputes. In substance, he submits that such a jurisdiction is procedurally defective and leaves many questions open.

In brief, Akuffo demands more consistency from the Supreme Court when applying the law to the facts and warns against the mistake of marrying new facts with old legalese arguments. His observations confirm that procedural integrity remains indispensable to maintaining public confidence in the courts.