Martin Kpebu condemns Bagbin's decision to suspend approval of ministerial nominees

Ghanaian

Legal practitioner Martin Kpebu has expressed disapproval of the pressure exerted on President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo by the Minority and Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin to sign the anti-gay bill while the matter was still pending in court.

Kpebu emphasized that according to Ghanaian law when a case is before the court, no actions should be taken that could

Read full articlerender the case ineffective.

On Thursday, Attorney-General and Minister for Justice Godfred Yeboah Dame denied receiving an interlocutory injunction in the case brought by MP Rockson-Nelson Etse K. Dafeamekpor.

The vetting process for the nomination of Ministers and Deputy Ministers of State was suspended by Parliament on Wednesday following an interlocutory injunction filed at the Supreme Court by MP Dafeamekpor.

Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin cited the lawsuit as the reason for suspending the vetting process, stating that it prevented Parliament from proceeding with the nominations.

In response, Mr. Dame disputed Bagbin’s assertion in a letter addressed to the Speaker, stating that no injunction had been filed and there was nothing before the Supreme Court to restrain Parliament.

In an interview with TV3, Mr Kpebu stated, “To be candid with you the matters the Attorney-General has raised don’t go far enough. The bottom line is that the Speaker was served with the writ. Now it’s very clear to us that it is not exactly accurate that the Speaker mentioned that there was an application or a motion for an injunction. When you say motion for an injunction, it has a very specific meaning, it is a document that you must see.

“I listened to the Speaker’s speech and he mentioned that document so that one is an error but even if you take that error on the part of the Speaker away, we are left with the sustentative matter, there is a matter in court challenging the whole vetting process, so even without an application for injunction, you are also required to stay your hands.

“Put it another way, under our laws of contempt, what it says is that when there is a matter in court the party should stay away from doing anything that renders the case useless or foolish case. Don’t do anything that will make the case a foolish case so yes by the time the Speaker was speaking there wasn’t an application for injunction, today it is there but as of yesterday the Speaker had been served with a writ.”

“That is a million-dollar question, so it tells you that I cannot support the position that the Speaker and the Minority took, if you ask me thousand times I will tell you I cannot support that position because the case is in court,” he added