Amadu justifies Minority’s boycott of Supreme Court nominees’ vetting
NPP Communications Team member Iddrisu Amadu says the Minority’s boycott was justified, arguing that Supreme Court nominees require broader public scrutiny because of the judiciary’s constitutional importance.
A member of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) Communications Team for the Navrongo Central Constituency, Iddrisu Amadu, has defended the decision by the Minority in Parliament to boycott the vetting of nominees to the Supreme Court.
The Minority staged the boycott during the Appointments Committee’s sitting on Thursday, August 27, citing concerns over the process leading to the vetting.
Speaking on the Big Mike Breakfast Show on Friday, August 28, Amadu criticised the process, arguing that Parliament should have allowed sufficient time for public scrutiny and input before proceeding with the vetting.
He said appointments to the Supreme Court required a higher level of scrutiny because of the judiciary’s critical role in Ghana’s constitutional democracy.
According to him, unlike Parliament and the Executive, the judiciary remains a permanent arm of government and continues to function despite changes in political administrations and Parliaments.
“The judiciary is a special arm of government,” Amadu said, explaining that while Parliament can be dissolved and a President can leave office, the judiciary continues to operate.
He therefore argued that the appointment of Supreme Court justices should not be handled in the same manner as the appointment and vetting of ministers.
Amadu questioned why Parliament could not have given members of the public more time to scrutinise the nominees and raise concerns before the process proceeded.
“Why not advertise the position for 14 days? Allow citizens to have their input,” he asked.
Amadu said the public should have been given an opportunity to submit memoranda, particularly because the Constitution sets out specific qualifications for persons appointed to serve on the Supreme Court.
“If you and I have evidence that we can prove that those three nominees were not fit, this was the only opportunity,” he said.
He further maintained that although Parliament has the authority to regulate its proceedings, its Standing Orders must operate within the broader framework of the Constitution and the public interest.
He consequently urged Parliament to prioritise the interests of Ghanaians over partisan considerations when dealing with appointments to critical state institutions, particularly the judiciary.
Mike 105.3FM I Navrongo | Elizabeth Apusaama
