Attorney General Godfred Yeboah Dame has asserted that the decision of four Members of Parliament (MPs) to run as independent candidates in the 2024 elections, despite originally entering Parliament on a political party ticket or as independents, does not necessitate the vacating of their seats.
This statement forms part of his defense in response to a suit filed by Majority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin, which seeks the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Article 97(1) of the 1992 Constitution regarding the potential forfeiture of the MPs’ seats due to their actions.
The Attorney General clarified that Article 97(1), which addresses “cross-carpeting,” pertains to MPs’ conduct in relation to the current Parliament, rather than their choices concerning a future Parliament.
In his statement, he noted, “A thorough textual analysis of the Constitution both plain and contextual concludes that the Constitution aims to prevent MPs from continuing to represent their constituents if, during the current parliamentary term, they leave the party under which they were elected to join another party or wish to remain in Parliament as independents. Such a situation would result in a vacation of their seats.”
Godfred Yeboah Dame emphasized that the term “Parliament,” as referenced in the Constitution, refers to the current session, not a future one.
Therefore, the MPs’ decisions regarding upcoming elections do not impact their existing seats.
He explained, “…the disqualification imposed on an MP who engages in any of the actions outlined in Article 97(1)(g) and (h) only applies when the actions take effect during the current Parliament, which has not been dissolved, and not in a future Parliament that has yet to begin.”
Dame concluded by stating that “the filing of nomination by a sitting MP to contest a future parliamentary election on a political party ticket, after being elected as an independent candidate for the current Parliament, does not lead to a vacation of their seat.”
