The current Second Deputy Speaker, an independent MP, has filed to contest the 2024 elections on the NPP ticket. In contrast, Cynthia Morrison and K. Asante, NPP MPs, have filed to run as independent candidates in 2024. An NDC MP has also filed to be an independent. These developments raised concerns about the NPP’s thin majority in the remainder of the 8th Parliament.

Some point to Speaker Oquaye’s ruling in the 7th Parliament when the current Second Deputy Speaker, then the Fomena NPP MP, filed as an independent. The Speaker ruled that the Fomena MP had vacated his seat.

At the time, those of us who know Ghana’s political history and appreciate what led to the laws against cross-carpeting argued that Speaker Oquaye’s ruling was incorrect. The NPP should have stood on principle and rejected the ruling, but instead, they either followed it or orchestrated the situation.

Unfortunately, Speaker Bagbin has followed Oquaye’s precedent. Article 97(1)(g) &(h) state that “a member of Parliament shall vacate his seat in Parliament if he leaves the party of which he was a member at the time of his election to Parliament to join another party or seeks to remain in Parliament as an independent member; or if he was elected a member of Parliament as an independent candidate and joins a political party.” The law within its true context, means that:

1. An MP must vacate their seat if they switch political parties during their term or if they attempt to continue serving as an independent MP after having been elected on a party ticket. This is designed to prevent party-hopping or political defection within the same parliamentary session.
2. Similarly, an MP elected as an independent candidate must vacate their seat if they join a political party during their term. This ensures that an independent MP does not undermine their independent mandate by aligning with a political party after being elected.

This law was introduced in the 1969, 1979 and 1992 Constitutions to simply prohibit carpet crossing within the same Parliament and does not concern an MP’s intentions for the next Parliament. One can only appreciate this reasoning by understanding our political history which serves as the spirit that brought this law into being in the first place.

So, what’s the historical antecedent of the law? In 1958, following the passage of the notorious Preventive Detention Act, some opposition members were arrested and detained, including Victor Owusu and R.R Amponsah. Busia had fled the country to avoid arrest and detention. Out of sheer fear, some MPs of the Northern Peoples’ Party, including Yakubu Tali, J.A. Braimah and the father of our current Vice President and Flag bearer of the NPP, Dr Bawumia, had to cross carpet to join the CPP to avoid the harassment and intimidation. By 1960, the number of the opposition in parliament had reduced from 32 to 16, while that of the CPP had increased to 88. It was with its enlarged strength in parliament that the CPP introduced the Republican Constitution.

The law against cross carpeting was therefore in response to what had happened in the past. Its purpose is to maintain political stability and prevent opportunistic or intimidating shifting of allegiances by MPs during their term. It aims to uphold the integrity of the electoral mandate, ensuring that MPs remain aligned with the political platform or independent status under which they were elected, avoiding disruption to party dynamics or parliamentary representation.

The law reflects our history in the first Republic, where the opposition was weakened by the government’s strategic poaching of MPs. It therefore cannot have anything to do with an MP's intentions in a future parliament. So, the literal interpretation given to it by Oquaye and Bagbin is wrong.

In 2008, Joe Osei Wusu, Seth Adjei Baah and Ofori Kuragu got into parliament as Independent Candidates, though they were NPP people. In 2012, when the NPP decided to allow them to contest on its ticket, they were not thrown out of parliament and their seats weren’t declared vacant. Instead, the NPP waited till around September before holding primaries for them.

It must be pointed out that, the idea of declaring seats vacant at a time when fresh elections cannot be immediately held to replace occupants, simply because of a future intent of a sitting MP, unnecessarily stifles representation as it denies constituents of their voice in parliament. Further, questions relating to the vacation of seats by MPs can only be determined by the high courts and not by the speaker of parliament or political parties. This is what Article 99 of the 1992 constitution says.

So, in my honest view, both Speakers Oquaye and Bagbin were wrong in their interpretations of the law without recourse to why we had the law in the first place. Also, it is not within their powers to declare seats as vacant. We should all be tired of political gamesmanship that distorts our history and our laws. For if we sacrifice the right thing in the expediency of partisan politics today, we will set bad precedents that will come back to haunt us tomorrow. Yesterday when it was wrong, the NPP liked it. But today that it is wrong, they are crying. This is what happens when we choose to do unprincipled politics.

Yaw Gyampo
A31, Prabiw
PAV Ansah Street
Saltpond
&
Suro Nipa House
Behind Old Post Office
Larteh-Akuapim