The Speaker of Parliament did not seem to understand the privileges of deputies – Prof. Asare

General News on Tuesday, June 11, 2019

Source: Myjoyonline.com

2019-06-11

An additional vote is attached to the debate between a High Court judge and the Speaker of Parliament on the privileges of a member of the legislature who is the subject of criminal prosecution.

Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare (who prefers to call himself Kwaku Azar), a staunch advocate of constitutional law, claimed that the Speaker of Parliament "misunderstood" his letter in which he baderted the privileges of the Bawku central MP, Mahama Ayariga, in front of Judge Afia Serwah Asare. Botwe for tax evasion.

The president, Professor Mike Oquaye, who is also a lawyer, wanted Mahama Ayariga's trial to proceed without hurting his parliamentary duties.

He referred to several provisions of the 1992 Constitution, sections 117, 118 and 122, all of which are related to privilege and contempt of Parliament to plead his case.

The judge would have nothing to do with that and she would have managed to get the beleaguered member to leave Parliament and go to court to go beyond the 13-hour time limit set by the judge at the June 4 hearing.

It ruled on the President's ruling that section 188 of Professor Mike Oquaye's thesis did not apply to the accused Mahama Ayariga.

This article stipulates that "neither the President, nor a Member of Parliament, nor the Clerk of Parliament may be compelled, when they appear before Parliament, to testify before a court or place outside Parliament".

The judge pointed out that Ayariga is an accused and not a witness in court.

Professor Kwaku Azar, based in the United States but very busy with Ghana's laws and politics, explained that Professor Mike Oquaye had "completely misunderstood" the privileges.

Professor Azar listed the three articles used by the President and stated that these laws were completely misunderstood, including Articles 115 and 119, to which the President did not refer directly in his letter.

He argued that the privileges of a Member mean that he or she should not be subject to any legal action for the work he or she does as a Member of Parliament. For example, nothing he says to Parliament, however scandalous it may be, can not be prosecuted.

In this case, such a prosecution is aimed "directly" at his work as a deputy, he explained. But if he set fire to another man's house, raped a woman or, in that case, avoided the presumed tax, he could not speak of his immunity.

Indeed, the charges do not directly target his parliamentary work, said the legal resource of social media.

The Bawku MP who is seeking immunity when he is involved in criminal proceedings reveals a lack of understanding of Ghana's laws.

India, which shares a similar legal system with Ghana, has a court to prosecute only corrupt deputies.

Privileges are not reserved for MPs, he said and explained that no judge can be tried for his work as a judge. If the President skips the red light, he can not expect to lift his immunity before the police to abandon any prosecution, he noted.

Professor Kwaku Azar stated that even the letter from the Speaker to the judge could be interpreted as contempt of court.

Indeed, "no one can direct a judge in the conduct of his work", as stipulated by the principle of the separation of powers in the 1992 constitution.

As MPs like to say that Parliament is perfectly in control of its own rules, they met a judge and a court that also controlled their own conduct, he noted.