Speaker To Drag Akufo-Addo To Court For Refusing To Sign Witchcraft, Armed Forces Bills

THE Speaker Ghana's of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, has pronounced moves by Parliament to seek constitutional interpretation over President Akufo-Addo’s decision not to pend his signature on some bills passed by Parliament.

According to Bagbin, last year President Akufo-Addo refuted to sign the Criminal Offences Bill of 2022, the Witchcraft Bill, and the Armed Forces Bill of 2023.

Meanwhile, Akufo-Addo has attributed his failure to sign the bill to a financial constraints hence refusing to assent to the supposed bills.

Reacting to this claims by the President,The Speaker of Parliament has disclosed that they will resort to court to seek legal interpretation.

“I want to end up by assuring you that I will definitely be in touch with my good friend the president, his excellency Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo even though I disagree with him in his refusal to assent to our bills and I have given notice that we will be in court about this matter,” he indicated.

 Mr Bagbin has stressed that President Akufo-Addo has no locus to determine the constitutionality of the Bills as it was the only the purview of the Supreme Court, for which reason any alleged misuse of power should be contested by it (the Supreme Court) and not no other individual.

President Akufo-Addo clearly identified the Ghana Armed Forces Amendment Bill, sponsored by MP Francis-Xavier Sosu, as pudding financial burdens coupled with replacing the death penalty with life imprisonment.

Mr Bagbin in an official response to the president, reiterated, “The determination of any unconstitutionality is the sole purview of the Supreme Court, not the President.

Hence, if there were concerns about Parliament acting beyond its constitutional authority, i.e., acting ultra vires, the appropriate course of action would be an action before the Supreme Court, not an executive declaration of unconstitutionality.”

“Again, the constitutional discretion vested in the presiding officer of Parliament, as per Article 108 and subject to Article 296, suggests that any allegations of misuse of this discretion should be contested in a court of competent jurisdiction, rather than being pre-emptively adjudicated upon by the President.”