Minority Leader and Member of Parliament for Effutu, Alexander Kwamena Afenyo-Markin, has formally filed a motion with the Speaker of Parliament seeking a review of the First Deputy Speaker’s March 5, 2025, ruling that blocked debate on the mass dismissal of public sector workers.
The ruling, issued by Deputy Speaker Bernard Ahiafor, sustained an objection to Private Members’ Motion No. 16, which sought to initiate parliamentary debate on a directive from the Chief of Staff that led to widespread termination of public sector appointments. Ahiafor cited pending court proceedings in Henry Nana Boakye v. Attorney General (Suit No: J1/12/2025) as justification under the sub judice rule in Standing Orders 103(f) and 123(1).
Also Read: AfDB to launch facility in Ghana to unlock infrastructure financing
But in his application filed on June 12, Afenyo-Markin argues that the ruling was a misapplication of parliamentary procedure and constitutional principles. Citing Order 127 of Parliament’s 2023 Standing Orders, he insists the Deputy Speaker’s decision undermines Parliament’s oversight authority, violates the principle of separation of powers, and sets a dangerous precedent that could paralyze the legislative process.
“This ruling threatens the very foundation of our democracy. Parliament cannot be muted simply because litigation exists. The people deserve answers and representation, especially regarding the hardship caused by the sweeping job losses,” Afenyo-Markin stated.
He invoked key constitutional provisions—Articles 93(2), 115, and 116—defending Parliament’s power to deliberate on matters of national interest without interference. He also referenced the Supreme Court’s May 6, 2025, decision in Vincent Ekow Assafuah v. Attorney General (Writ No: J1/18/2025), which clarified that constitutional bodies can only be restrained by a court order, not by mere pending litigation.
Quoting Justice Kulendi’s concurring opinion, Afenyo-Markin said: “Only an express judicial injunction, grounded in a showing of irreparable harm, can halt the constitutional functions of a body. No such injunction exists here. Parliament must not surrender its role based on conjecture.”
To further support his position, he cited Erskine May’s Parliamentary Practice, which stresses the discretionary nature of the sub judice rule and provides exceptions for matters of national urgency. He also referenced a 2012 ruling by then-Speaker Joyce Bamford-Addo, who allowed parliamentary debate to proceed on a contentious electoral instrument despite ongoing litigation.
“Speaker Bamford-Addo’s ruling remains a landmark in safeguarding legislative independence. We must follow her principled example,” Afenyo-Markin said.
He warned that the precedent set by the Deputy Speaker’s ruling could encourage strategic lawsuits designed to silence Parliament and shield the executive from scrutiny. “If this stands, anyone can file a suit to prevent parliamentary oversight. That’s not democracy—it’s manipulation,” he cautioned.
In response, the Speaker of Parliament clarified that he cannot unilaterally overturn decisions taken by the House in his absence, emphasizing that the collective will of Parliament supersedes individual roles. However, he assured members that Afenyo-Markin’s motion will be scheduled for a formal debate, allowing MPs to express their views and potentially influence procedural reforms during the upcoming constitutional review.
By Osumanu Al-Hassan/thenewsbulletin24.com