The Supreme Court has clarified its recent ruling supporting a suit filed by Majority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin, emphasizing that Members of Parliament (MPs) are required to vacate their seats if they switch political parties during their current parliamentary term.
The court explained that, according to Articles 97(1)(g) and (h) of the Constitution, an MP who changes political affiliation within the same term must lose their seat. This ruling does not apply to MPs who contest future elections under a different political party; it is limited strictly to MPs who alter their party allegiance while serving in Parliament.
The judgment further elaborated that this constitutional requirement also applies to independent MPs. If an independent MP joins a political party during their term, they too must vacate their seat. This measure underscores the Constitution’s intent to maintain the integrity of party representation within a parliamentary term.
Link to full document.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1i16aazLmY3AmTWw3wPe7TpXILjyHDIUG/view
The court stressed that the constitutional provisions are designed solely for the current term in office and do not extend to scenarios in future elections. MPs who choose to run for Parliament under a different party in subsequent elections are not affected by this ruling.
The judgment reads: “The only plausible conclusion from a holistic and contextual reading of Article 97(1)(g) and (h) is that an MP’s seat shall be vacated upon departure from the cohort of their elected party in Parliament to join another party, while seeking to remain in that Parliament as a member of the new party.”
In summary, the Supreme Court’s decision distinctly outlines that MPs who switch political affiliations within the same term will lose their seats, ensuring that these constitutional articles pertain only to current parliamentary terms and not to future electoral ambitions.
