In an interview to with JoyNews, lawyer Martin Kpebu strongly disagreed with the Supreme Court’s assertion that special circumstances justified granting Afenyo-Markin’s ex-parte motion in the case involving Speaker Alban Bagbin. “Absolutely, I don’t see the special circumstances,” Kpebu stated, questioning the urgency with which the court handled the matter.
Kpebu noted that the case was filed at 12:40 p.m. on Friday, October 18, yet by 2:00 p.m., a panel of five judges was assembled to hear it—a timeline he called “very curious.” He argued that the court could have waited, given that the alleged disruption of government business was slated for Tuesday, October 22. “There was a lot of time,” he pointed out, adding that if there were a genuine emergency, the court could have sat on Saturday or Sunday to allow time to serve the Speaker.
Emphasizing his extensive experience in legal practice, Kpebu said, “Most of the time when you go to court asking for an ex-parte order, judges say, ‘Go and serve the other side,’ even in less consequential matters.” He argued that the Speaker of Parliament, as a high-ranking official, should have been notified before any ex-parte decision was made. “Speaker of Parliament… you would never get an ex-parte order against him in such a rush.”
Kpebu attributed the decision to individual biases, stating that legal training and political views often influence judicial decisions. “Anybody you hear who says he’s a lawyer in Ghana—it’s one exam, one law school,” he remarked. “The rest is made up of your own idiosyncrasies… your political views. That is what we are reading into the text and that is how it influences the case.” Watch the video below
According to Kpebu, the decision lacked the so-called “special circumstances” and should have followed standard protocol by ensuring the Speaker’s representation before proceeding.
