Speaker of Parliament, Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin, has cautioned the judiciary to refrain from interfering with parliamentary decisions.

His remarks come in the wake of a Supreme Court ruling that interfered with his decision to declare four parliamentary seats vacant.

Mr. Bagbin cites the case of Tuffour vs. Attorney General, highlighting a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of Ghana that established a key principle: the judiciary should not interfere in the internal proceedings of Parliament.

“So the court must, and has always been hesitant to interfere in the proceedings and decisions of Parliament. In the celebrated case of Tuffour vs. the Attorney General, the Supreme Court affirmed that happenings in Parliament are a closed book. Despite these provisions, the courts are replete with debates and proceedings of Parliament,” the Speaker expressed.

Meanwhile, Alban Baqgbin has voiced strong criticism against both President Nana Akufo-Addo and the Judiciary, accusing them of constitutional violations concerning the Anti-LGBTQ+ bill.

Speaking at a media briefing ahead of Parliament’s upcoming session on November 7, Bagbin alleged that the President and the Judiciary have undermined Parliament’s authority by stalling the bill’s progress, despite it being duly passed by the legislative body.

Bagbin claimed that both institutions had “sinned against the constitution” and emphasized that they “must seek the opportunity to confess and repent to be forgiven.”

His remarks come amid delays that have stalled the bill’s enactment, with the President declining to receive the bill due to ongoing legal challenges.

“The courts are replete with debates and proceedings of Parliament,” Bagbin said, adding that it is concerning that some of these cases have been initiated by Members of Parliament (MPs) themselves. “Most worrying is these proceedings are initiated by some Members of Parliament—even leaders of Parliament—who are to know better,” he noted, expressing frustration that MPs, who should be “loyal to Parliament,” frequently turn to the Supreme Court “to undermine Parliament.”