The Supreme Court has provided a comprehensive explanation for its decision to uphold the suit brought by Majority Leader, Alexander Afenyo- Markin.
The Court noted that, Article 97 (1)g and (h) of the constitution, do not extend to future parliamentary terms, such as when an MP runs for election under a different political party in subsequent elections.
“It follows from the above therefore, that the only plausible conclusion which must necessarily flow from a holistic and contextual reading of Article 97(1)(g) and (h) is that an MP’s seat shall be vacated upon departure from the cohort of his elected party in Parliament to join another party in Parliament while seeking to remain in that Parliament as a member of the new party,”.
According to the Supreme Court, a Member of Parliament (MP) can only be considered to have vacated their seat if they change their political identity and remain in Parliament under the new identity.
The court noted that, the ruling supports the suit filed by the Majority Leader, clarifying that, the relevant constitutional procedure applies only within the current term of parliament.
