Former Ghana Ambassador to the Netherlands, Dr. Tony Aidoo, has expressed concern over the recent decisions made by the Supreme Court in cases involving political matters.
According to Dr. Aidoo, the apex court’s judgments have increasingly favoured the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP), a trend he believes raises questions about the court’s neutrality.
Dr. Aidoo shared his views on JoyNews’ Newsfile, pointing out a pattern he perceives as an overreach by the Supreme Court, particularly in cases with political implications.
“The Supreme Court has, over the past years, especially under the Akufo-Addo administration, behaved in a manner as if it is a supranational, supraconstitutional body that can interfere in every act of Parliament,” he stated.
Dr. Aidoo described this trend as a deviation from the court’s mandate, suggesting it may be acting as “an extension of the New Patriotic Party.”
Dr. Aidoo cited the recent case brought by Majority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin, challenging the Speaker’s declaration of four parliamentary seats vacant.
He questioned the court’s basis for accepting the case, asserting that it did not present a legitimate cause for interpretation. “Afenyo-Markin’s writ did not show any legal cause for interpretation,” he argued.
“All it showed was the consequences of the act of the four Members of Parliament, that they will be deprived of their membership and so on. Those are not legal matters. They are the consequences of their actions under a constitutional provision that is clear and does not require interpretation.”
According to Dr. Aidoo, the court’s willingness to address matters that lack a legal basis for interpretation is indicative of judicial overreach, especially in cases where constitutional provisions are unambiguous.
He expressed his concern that such decisions may undermine the court’s credibility and weaken public confidence in the judiciary’s independence.
“What happened to the constituents in Assin North regarding Gyakye Quayson’s case? Weren’t they also deprived of representation? Where about SALL? The thousands of people in SALL who have been denied representation for four years. The Supreme Court is not predictable in its application of the law. And I said that does not help our democratic process. Today, you stand here, you contradict yourself. Tomorrow, you stand there, contradict yourself. Did we set up a support supra-constitutional body to terrorize us or to guide our constitutional behaviour,” he said.
On October 30, the Supreme Court dismissed an application by Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin, who sought to overturn the Court’s ruling that suspended his declaration of four parliamentary seats as vacant.
This follows an initial suit filed by Effutu MP Alexander Afenyo-Markin, challenging the Speaker’s declaration.
The Speaker’s legal team argued that the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction in this case, among other grounds canvassed in court.
However, after hearing arguments from all parties, including the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, the Supreme Court maintained that its earlier ruling was appropriate, stating that the Speaker’s appeal was without merit.
“We have considered the application, and we have come to the conclusion that the grounds supporting the application have no merit,” the Chief Justice stated.
Prior to this decision, the Court also dismissed an objection raised by Thaddeus Sory, counsel for the Speaker, regarding the empanelling of Justice Ernest Gaewu.
