The Supreme Court has dismissed an objection to the empaneling of Justice Ernest Gaewu in a case involving the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin.
The dismissal was issued on Wednesday, October 30, following arguments presented by Thaddeus Sory, a lawyer for the Speaker, who contended that Justice Gaewu’s prior political ties posed a conflict of interest.
Mr Sory’s argument hinged on Gaewu’s past role as a parliamentary candidate for the New Patriotic Party (NPP), the current ruling party in Ghana, suggesting that his previous affiliations might influence his decisions on the case at hand.
Lawyers representing Speaker Bagbin have asked Justice Gaewu to recuse himself from a case that challenges the Speaker’s recent decision to declare certain parliamentary seats vacant.
This request was made to ensure impartiality in the proceedings, as the Speaker of Parliament’s office argued that Justice Gaewu’s ties to the NPP could influence his judgment.
They noted that his previous political candidacy could create potential bias in cases involving decisions from Parliament, which requires a fair and balanced judicial approach.
The Supreme Court commenced hearings on the case on Wednesday, October 30, as Speaker Bagbin seeks to overturn the Court’s earlier ruling.
This prior decision granted a stay of execution on Bagbin’s declarations of certain parliamentary seats as vacant, which could affect parliamentary representation and political dynamics within the legislative body.
The Speaker’s legal team maintains that a fair trial requires an impartial panel free of political associations that could affect the outcome.
Thaddeus Sory, representing the Speaker, emphasized the relevance of Justice Gaewu’s political past, stating, “He was known to be associated with New Patriotic Party (NPP) and in fact he was a parliamentary candidate in one of their constituencies in the Volta Region.”
Despite these objections, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of maintaining Justice Gaewu on the bench for the proceedings, setting the stage for a closely-watched legal battle with potential implications for parliamentary integrity and judicial independence in Ghana.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
