<<Print>>

The Director of Legal Affairs for the National Democratic Congress (NDC), Godwin Edudzi Tamakloe, says reasons adduced by the Chief Justice, Her Ladyship Gertrude Torkonoo for granting the Attorney-General, an expedited hearing in a recent case against the approval of some ministerial nominees does not hold water.

The Chief Justice on April 4, clarified that the content of the letter from the A-G for the request was cogent enough to warrant an expedited hearing.

According to her, another reason which necesitated the approval for the expedited hearing was because the courts were going on Easter break, hence the fast-tracking process.

Reacting to the explanation given by the Chief Justice, Edudzi Tamakloe, who was speaking on Joy FM’s Top Story, questioned the linkage between expediting the hearing and the Easter break.

He argued that based on the 1992 constitution, the Supreme Court cannot order Parliament to have a sitting when the House is on recess.

“....the CJ says we were going on an Easter break, and so for that matter, they needed the matter heard. We all do appreciate that once parliament is adjourned, the court cannot make an order directing Parliament to go and sit to consider the approval of the ministers.

"So, from when the court dismissed the injunction application, it's been a week now. Has Parliament been recalled? No.

"If the decision was that because we were going on Easter break, the court needed to expedite the decision on the issue of the ministerial appointment, what has been the effect?" he quizzed.

"The process to get Parliament to sit when it adjourns is to get a certain number of MPs to do A, B, C, and D, and so the fact that we were going on Easter break, and therefore there was a need for an expedited hearing, does not solve the problem as far as the letter or the statement from the NDC is concerned," he added.

Background 

It is recalled that on March 27, the Supreme Court dismissed an application brought forth by South Dayi MP, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, contesting the approval of new ministerial and deputy ministerial nominees.

In a unanimous decision, a five-member panel of the court deemed the application frivolous and an abuse of the court process and dismissed it.

Hon. Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, the applicant, had aimed to halt the vetting process in Parliament until his lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the President's decision to reassign ministers without Parliament's involvement was resolved.

Ruling

However, the Supreme Court concluded that the MP's case lacked direct relevance to the nominees under consideration in Parliament, as it primarily pertained to reassigned ministers.