Former Foreign Affairs Minister Hanna Tetteh has waded into the conversation about the Supreme Court’s decision to stay the implementation of the decision by the Speaker of Parliament to declare four seats vacant.
In a statement shared via social media, Hanna Tetteh questioned the Supreme Court if they listen to public sentiments on their rulings.
She acknowledged that “Of course, they are expected to interpret the law and ensure its application without fear of favour but they do so within the context of the society that the laws govern”.
The former foreign affairs minister reminded the Supreme Court that “A strong, principled judiciary is essential to a competitive but peaceful democracy. They have an important role to play in ensuring this democracy not only survives but thrives”.
Read Her Post Below
When the Justices of the Supreme Court make their decisions or make orders in whatever circumstances, not just in the context of the recent ex-parte decision against the Speaker’s ruling, do they listen to the public commentary and reflect on their decision, its implications and how it has been received not only by the parties to the particular suit or in a case with political undertones the legal profession, the businesses/investor community, the diplomatic community, religious actors, the unions, civil society and other key social actors? Of course, they are expected to interpret the law and ensure its application without fear of favour but they do so within the context of the society that the laws govern.
We live in hyper-partisan times, and the closer we get to elections the more tense the political environment, and consequently the times when peace and security within the state are at its most fragile.
A strong, principled judiciary is essential to a competitive but peaceful democracy. They have an important role to play in ensuring this democracy not only survives but thrives.
