The Supreme Court has released the full reasons behinds it’s unanimous decision to rule that Deputy Speakers have the right to vote while presiding.
In a unanimous decision of the seven-member panel, authored by Justice Yonny Kulendi, the court held that the 1992 Constitution does not place any restriction on a Deputy Speaker from being part of the quorum for decision making, and to vote on matters for determination.
The Supreme Court among other reasons stated that it was compelled by the Constitution to hold that a Deputy Speaker or person presiding not lose their right to vote when presiding over proceedings.
The court however emphasised that the procedural and or operational rules to practicisalise the protection of the constitutional right in a member presiding in the absence of the Speaker and his or her duty to represent to represent his or her constituents in the vote and decision are matters within the exclusive domain of parliament itself.
Parliament may achieve this by amending its orders or adopting parliamentary practices to give effect to this constitutional imperative, the judgement said.
The court also held that Deputy Speakers were Members of Parliament (MPs) elected as representatives of constituencies, and therefore causing them to lose their casting vote would amount to disenfranchising their constituents in Parliament.
“To cause a member to forfeit their vote in Parliament merely on account of having to preside over the business of the House in the Speaker’s absence would unfairly disenfranchise not only the presiding member but also their constituents. Such an interpretation would likely give rise to certain perverse outcomes.
“For example, it could lead to opportunistic absences by a Speaker or one of the other Deputy Speakers, as an absence would mean a vote loss by the presiding member and their party,” the court held.
By: Rainbowradioonline.com/Ghana
