Obtaining review of SC’s ruling on voting rights of Deputy Speaker will be difficult – Lawyer

He is casting doubt over the possibility of the Supreme Court changing its unanimous decision in the case, Justice Abdulai v Attorney-General.

Is allowance instantly strangers applauded

A private legal practitioner, Bobby Banson, has cast doubt over the possibility of the Supreme Court changing its unanimous decision that a presiding Deputy Speaker of Parliament can be counted as part of a quorum for decision-making and exercise the right to vote.

Speaking on Saturday, March 19, 2022, during JoyNews Newsfile, he explained that the seven members of the original panel will be part of the new panel whose number may increase to 9.

He argued that since the original 7 have already taken their stance on the matter, it will be difficult to get them to change their minds, adding that the other two (even if they both agree that the decision is overturned) will be in the minority.  

“To be frank, it looks like a 0.1% chance. With a review, unless in exceptional circumstances it is the same panel – the seven original members are retained then two members are added and so it’s like you’re starting from a position where you have 7 against 2.

“The two are the ones that are coming in with a fresh mind, so the ease with which you can convince them is on an equal rate, but with the seven, they already have given you their conclusion and it was unanimous,” he said.

More so, he said the difficulty will result from the Apex Court’s declaration that even if their decision was erroneous, one cannot argue the same point of law before them on review.  

He made the comment on the back of suggestions that Justice Abdulai, the plaintiff in the case concerning the voting rights of Deputy Speakers, would seek a review.

Former President John Dramani Mahama had earlier described the 7-0 unanimous decision of the apex court that presiding deputy speakers had the right to vote as “regrettable” and “I look forward to the applicant applying for a review of this ruling,” he said.