Judges who misinterpret constitution not different from coup plotters - Kpessa Whyte on SC ruling

Sit-in Speakers of Parliament can still vote - SC rules

SC rules on constitutionality of sit-in Speakers of Parliament to vote

Kpessa-Whyte reacts to Supreme Court ruling

A Senior Research Fellow in History and Politics at the Institute of African Studies of the University of Ghana, Dr. Michael Kpessa-Whyte, has linked the ruling of the Supreme Court in the

Read full article.matter of the constitutionality of a sit-in Speaker of Parliament to vote or not, to military takeovers.

In a tweet shared by the lecturer, he said that the import of the ruling of the apex court is no different from what coup plotters do.

“We have a duty to defend our Constitution especially against judicial misinterpretation by the apex court. Judges who deliberately misinterprete the Constitution to serve partisan purpose are not different from those who seek to overthrow the Constitution via the barrel of guns,” he wrote.

TWI NEWS

The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday, March 9, 2022, in a case brought to it by a law lecturer, Justice Abdulai, seeking the interpretation of the court on whether or not a First Deputy Speaker of Parliament, while presiding over the House can still cast a vote.

In a unanimous decision of 7-0, the SC ruled that any sit-in Speaker can still cast a vote, contrary to the Standing Orders of Parliament.

This ruling has however received several reactions from across board, for and against it.

We have a duty to defend our Constitution especially against judicial misinterpretation by the apex court. Judges who deliberately misinterprete the Constitution to serve partisan purpose are not different from those who seek to overthrow the Constitution via the barrel of guns.

— Michael Kpessa-Whyte (@kpessawhyte) March 11, 2022