Godfred Dame, the Attorney-General, has affirmed that Parliament is within its rights to proceed with the approval processes for the President's ministerial and deputy ministerial nominations. This assertion comes amidst an ongoing legal dispute regarding the vetting and approval of new ministers.
Dame argued that there is no risk of undermining the authority of the Supreme Court in determining the substantive issues raised by Mr Rockson-Nelson Etsa Dafeamekpor, the plaintiff in the case. The Attorney-General made these remarks in an official statement to Parliament addressing the House's recent suspension of nomination considerations due to an interlocutory injunction filed at the Supreme Court by Mr Dafeamekpor.
Parliament had temporarily halted the vetting and approval processes following the injunction, rendering it impossible to proceed with the nominations, according to Speaker Alban Bagbin. However, Dame pointed out that the lawsuit filed by Dafeamekpor lacked essential components required by the Supreme Court Rules, 1996 (C. I. 16), including the absence of a statement of the case supporting the writ and the failure to properly constitute the suit within the stipulated time frame.
Furthermore, Dame emphasized that the plaintiff did not file an application for interlocutory injunction specifically seeking to restrain the Speaker from proceeding with the vetting and approval of the nominees, as alleged. He clarified that a mere mention of such relief on the writ does not constitute a pending motion for the desired relief and therefore does not hinder Parliament's authority to approve ministerial nominees in accordance with constitutional provisions.
The Attorney-General conducted a search at the Supreme Court Registry, revealing that while the relief stated on the writ referred to an interlocutory injunction, no formal application for such relief had been filed. He emphasized that the substance of Dafeamekpor's suit, challenging the President's authority to reassign ministers, does not affect Parliament's duty to consider and approve nominees presented by the President under Articles 78(1) and 79(1) of the Constitution.
In conclusion, Dame reiterated that the Constitution does not preclude Parliament from proceeding with the approval processes for ministerial and deputy ministerial nominees duly presented by the President, despite the ongoing legal challenge.