Parliament erred in removing Kpandai MP Matthew Nyindam from office following a High Court ruling, according to Professor of International Law and Human Rights at the University of Ghana School of Law, Kwadwo Appiagyei-Atua.

Prof. Appiagyei-Atua argued on JoyNews’ Newsfile programme on Saturday, December 20, that the legislature failed to fully consider the legal ramifications of ongoing appeals when it acted on the High Court’s decision.

He explained that while the Speaker of Parliament rightly acknowledged the mandatory seven-day stay of execution following the judgment, the case had already progressed beyond the High Court.

“The Speaker made a ruling referring to the mandatory seven-day stay, which was respected by Parliament, but the matter had been taken to the Court of Appeal and the NPP has proceeded to the Supreme Court for that decision of the High Court to be quashed,” he stated.

According to the law professor, triggering the appellate process necessitated maintaining the status quo – allowing Mr. Nyindam to continue serving – until all court proceedings were completed.

He emphasized that this approach would have been in line with established constitutional practice and a demonstration of respect for due process. “I think that here the matter should have stayed, and the Member of Parliament, Matthew Nyindam, should have been allowed to stay in his seat,” Prof Appiagyei-Atua said.

His comments come amid increasing legal scrutiny of the handling of the Kpandai parliamentary dispute, particularly after the Supreme Court intervened to halt preparations for a rerun election.

The Supreme Court’s decision to suspend the Electoral Commission’s processes pending a final determination of the case reinforces the view of many legal experts that proceeding before the conclusion of appeals could exacerbate institutional and constitutional uncertainties.

Image Source: MYJOYONLINE