Two citizens head to Supreme Court to seek clarity on Parliament’s immunity
The issue of immunity and privileges of members of parliament has come up once again as two Ghanaians are headed to the Supreme Court to seek its interpretation and clarity on the matter.
A careful look at Article 117 of the 1992 constitution prevents any criminal and civil process from any court being served or executed in relation to the Speaker or a Member of the Clerk of Parliament while the person is on her way or carrying out any parliament duty.
Two citizens namely, Hilda Mansuwa Kpentey Dongotey and Albert Gyamfi explain that framers of the constitution could not have intended the expression “proceedings of Parliament” to refer to the entire duration of a session or a meeting of the House.
Filed by Samson Lardi Anyenini, Lawyer for the two, the two are seeking the Supreme Court to declare that an MP, a Speaker, Deputy Speaker, or a Clerk to Parliament can be arrested for any offence committed while on his or her way to, attending, or returning from any proceedings of Parliament.
Their argument stems from the refusal of the Speaker to release the Member of Parliament for Madina, Francis-Xavier Sosu to aid the police with investigations into alleged criminal offences during a demonstration he organized over bad roads in his constituency.
Previous attempts to arrest the lawmaker, Francis-Xavier Sosu, did not yield any results with the Police resorting to the court to secure criminal summons against him after Parliament had shown strong signals of its unwillingness to corporate with the law enforcement body.
The MP on the other hand is yet to honour two court invitations so far saying he has not been served the criminal summons.
He has also commenced a legal battle against the Police calling on the court to enforce his human rights to protest while also seeking an injunction on the attempts by the Police to arrest and prosecute him until the determination of his case.
By: Stella Annan | myactiveonline.com Twitter @activetvgh
