Godfred Yeboah Dame
THE ATTORNEY General, Godfred Yeboah Dame, has filed his statement of case to the suit filed by some three Minority Members of Parliament who are challenging the passage of the Electronic Transaction Act (E-Levy).
According to the Attorney General, the suit does not disclose any cause of action to warrant a trial by the Supreme Court.
The AG argues that the plaintiffs do not allude to a single provision of the constitution or any other law by which they can be understood as contending that Parliament enacted a law in excess of powers conferred upon it by the constitution or by any law.
He again argues that the plaintiffs do not allege that Parliament violated the mode of exercising legislative power spelt out under Article 106 of the Constitution, adding that Article 106 of the Constitution does not even feature at all throughout the statement of case of the plaintiffs.
“On the contrary, plaintiffs’ suit is simply about an enforcement of a previous decision of the Court (Justice Abdulai versus Attorney General) and purport to raise questions about the internal procedure embarked upon by Parliament for the conduct of proceedings in Parliament on a particular day – 29th March 2022,” Mr. Dame said.
Minority Leader, Haruna Iddrisu together with his colleague NDC MPs, Mahama Ayariga and Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, after the passage of the bill filed a writ at the Supreme Court contesting that Parliament did not have the required number to form a quorum to vote and approve the E-Levy Act (Act 1075).
They contend that Parliament did not have the required number to form a quorum to vote and approve the E-Levy.
They are, therefore, asking the Apex Court to set aside the decision of Parliament to vote and pass the bill with less than half of the MPs present at the time of forming the quorum.
But Mr. Dame, in his statement of case, argues that although the plaintiffs claim that Parliament did not have the required number to pass the Act, the official record of Parliament on March 29, 2022, shows that the E-Levy Bill was taken through the various constitutionally stipulated procedure in Article 106 of the Constitution, and at least one-half of all validly elected MPs were present in Parliament when the question whether to pass the bill was posed after the second reading before same was subsequently passed into law.
The AG further argues that all the Minority MPs recorded as having attended proceedings of Parliament on the day in question were present in the Chamber of Parliament when the approval of the tax was conducted, adding that there is nothing before the court indicating the contrary.
“The defendant further says that the E-Levy Bill was duly passed by Parliament in accordance with Article 104(1) after the third reading. At least 137 Members of Parliament who constituted the constitutionally prescribed one-half Members of Parliament were present when same was passed,” the AG avers.
Mr. Dame argues that the court will note, upon a careful consideration of the facts of the case, that the plaintiffs do not make a claim that E-Levy Act was made in excess of the powers conferred on Parliament or any other authority or person by law or under the Constitution.
“It is our humble submission that by dint of long settled authorities in the courts of Ghana as well as mandatory provisions in the Constitution, 1992, the courts do not question the conduct of proceedings in Parliament, save and except where the proceedings border on a violation of the Constitution or a law of Ghana.
“Thus, the courts can question the constitutionality or legality of a decision of Parliament, but the courts do not extend their writs to inquire into what happens in Parliament or how proceedings are conducted in Parliament,” Mr. Dame avers.
Again, he states that assuming without admitting that there was a walk out by the Minority Members of Parliament before the decision to approve the E-Levy Bill was taken, at the time of that decision, the quorum requirement as provided in Article 104(1) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana was satisfied, as there were at least 137 members of the Majority present in Parliament.
“The records show that the election of the Member of Parliament for Assin North had been cancelled by the High Court, Cape Coast, and an appeal by the affected Member of Parliament struck out by the Court of Appeal on 22nd March 2022,” Mr. Dame added.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak