New Patriotic Party (NPP) Member of Parliament for Ahafo Ano North in the Ashanti Region, Suleman Adamu Sanid, has filed a suit at the Supreme Court, seeking interpretation of Article 97c of the 1992 Constitution.
His application filed at the registry of the Supreme Court on Thursday, 27 October 2022, follows a recent ruling delivered by the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Kingsford Somana Bagbin, that the entire House will debate a report submitted by the privileges committee, which recommended the removal of Dome Kwabenya member of parliament, Sarah Adwoa Safo, from office for being absent from fifteen sittings of a meeting of Parliament.
Contention of MP
It is the contention of the Ahafo Ano North lawmaker that the Speaker of Parliament’s ruling breached the clear provisions and the laid down processes in Article 97c of the 1992 constitution.
Article 97c of the 1992 constitution states that; “A member of Parliament shall vacate his seat in Parliament if he is absent, without the permission in writing of the Speaker and he is unable to offer a reasonable explanation to the Parliamentary Committee on Privileges from fifteen sittings of a meeting of Parliament during any period that Parliament has been summoned to meet and continues to meet”.
This provision according to Suleman Adamu Sanid, prescribes a process for a member of Parliament to vacate his or her sit. He urges in his writ that, following the formal complaint filed in Parliament about the absence of the member of parliament for Dome Kwabenya, the speaker referred the complaint to the privileges committee.
The committee moved swiftly to do its work and have subsequently fulfilled all the laid down procedure stipulated in the 1992 constitution, specifically, in Article 97c.
All the Speaker is requested to do is to adopt the findings of the privileges committee and to declare the seat vacant.
To this end, Suleman Adamu Sanid, is praying the Supreme Court to declare Bagbin’s ruling, calling for the entire House to debate the report of the privileges committee before a collective decision is taken through voting, as unconstitutional, null, void and of no effect.
Speaker’s ruling
Speaker Alban Bagbin in his ruling on Wednesday 26 October 2022, said that, “any other committee of parliament is subject to the consideration of the House by way of a motion. Again I am inspired and convinced that this position of the law by provision of the constitution. The decision as to whether or not to admit a motion is the exclusive preserve of the speaker.”
He added, “In view of the foregoing, the House is well within its right to receive and consider the report of the committee and make a determination arising out of the recommendation…it is my ruling that the motion was rightfully admitted and the report of the committee is subject to the consideration of the House.”
“It goes without saying that the preliminary objection of the Majority Leader to the admissibility of the motion for the consideration of the report of the committee is hereby dismissed…” Bagbin said.