The Supreme Court has dismissed an application for review filed by private legal practitioner and law lecturer, Justice Abdulai, challenging the court’s decision that Deputy Speakers of Parliament are entitled to vote when presiding in the absence of the Speaker.
A nine-member panel of the court presided over by Justice Jones Dotse held that the application was unmeritorious and did not meet the threshold set for review of the court’s decision.
Justice Abdulai had filed the application seeking the court to reverse its decision that Deputy Speakers are entitled to be counted for the purposes of forming a quorum and can vote when presiding in the absence of the Speaker.
His motions averred that the failure of the Ordinary Bench to consider the legislative antecednts in Ghana on the original vote of a Deputy Speaker or any person presiding in Parliament as borne out of the 1957 Constitution, the Parliament Act, 1965 (Act 300) and continuous effect of the Constitution led to its decision.
It also averred that the failure of the Ordinary Bench to consider Article 297(h) of the Constitution and Section 10 of the Parliament Act in interpreting Articels 295(2) and 104(2) led to the court’s decision that Deputy Speakers can vote.
Again, the motion for review argued that the Ordinary Bench failed to consider the saving clause in article 104(1) in interpreting Articles 102 and 104(2) of the Constitution which consequently led to it decision. “We submit that the Ordinary Bench in construing Article 104(1) failed to consider the saving words “except as otherwise provided” which led it to the erroneous conclusion that there is no express disqualification of a presiding Deputy Speaker of parliament from being counted in determining a quorum of Parliament or casting an original vote”, he argues.
But the court in a unanimous decision dismissed it for lacking merit.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak