Political science lecturer Dr. Isaac Brako has expressed disappointment in some of the comments made by Speaker Alban Bagbin on the grounds that parliament is an independent body that cannot have any form of interference from the judiciary.
He explained that the Supreme Court and the judiciary, in particular, have constitutional authority to deal with legal interpretation issues, which no other state institution has.
He stated that the law recognises the existence and independence of the various branches of government in order to avoid conflicts, and that combining the legislative and executive powers would result in the absence of liberty. When you combine the judiciary and legislative powers, you get arbitrary rules. When the judiciary and the executive combine, oppression results, and when all three are combined, tyranny ensues.
To avoid any of these issues, we have agreed to a separation of powers. To avoid conflicts and tyranny, we established checks and balances, such as a budget that the president will submit to Parliament for approval. When Parliament passes a law, the President gives his approval. The judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, has the authority to interpret Ghana’s constitution and laws.
Speaking in an interview on Frontline on Rainbow Radio 87.5FM, the lecturer said the Supreme Court also has judicial review functions and ensures that the two other arms of government do not engage in acts that violate or undermine the constitution of Ghana.
”The Supreme Court has judicial review functions and oversight responsibility to ensure that the two other organs of government do not violate or undermine Ghana’s constitution. If any of the other two branches of government violate the constitution, the Supreme Court can declare it unconstitutional and thus null and void. As a result, if Parliament or the President acts in violation of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has the authority to declare the action invalid. “That is the Supreme Court’s judicial review function.”
He cited Article 125(3), which states that the judicial power of Ghana shall be vested in the judiciary. Accordingly, neither the President nor Parliament nor any organ or agency of the President or Parliament shall have or be given final judicial power.
He also referenced Article 125 (5) which stipulates that the judiciary shall have jurisdiction in all matters, civil and criminal including matters relating to this constitution and such other jurisdiction as parliament may by law confer on it adding that neither the President nor any person acting under the authority of the President or Parliament nor any other person whatsoever shall interfere with judges or judicial officers or other persons exercising judicial power in the exercise of their judicial functions and all organs and agencies of the state shall accord to the court such assistance as the court may reasonably require to protect the independence, dignity and effectiveness of the court subject to this constitution. I am not a lawyer, but what exactly is the provision of the constitution communicating?
He called for cool heads to prevail from both sides, underscoring the need for parties involved to allow the court to settle the confusion surrounding the interpretation of the law.
‘Why don’t all the parties exercise restraint and allow the Supreme Court to preside over the matter and bring finality to it rather than having both sides lay claim to being the majority in parliament? This is unfortunate and could spell down and could push us into a constitutional crisis. I think we should tread with caution.’’
By: Rainbowradioonline.com/Ghana
