The Speaker of Parliament, Mr. Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin says staging a walk-out in Parliament does not render the House incapable of continuing with its business.
To the Speaker, staging a walkout does not mean that decisions are taken by the House, in the absence of the members who walked out, do not stand.
According to the speaker, the following instances are quite instructive on this account;
On the 20th of June 2002, the sitting of the House was suspended after an objection was raised by Hon. Kwakye Addo, MP for Afram Plains South for the absence of a quorum to commence public business. The Rt. Hon. Peter Ala-Adjetey began the process of adjourning the House until his attention was drawn to the fact that Members had begun to fill the chamber. It is important to reiterate the comments of the then-Majority Leader, Hon. Paapa Owusu-Ankomah cautioned that the issue of quorum be looked at since members could be in attendance at Committee sittings, and be conducting Parliamentary business, but not present on the Floor of the House and thus, not counted to form a quorum. Hon. Paapa Owusu-Ankomah’s premise is viewed on a point of law.
The issue of quorum is on members present in Parliament and not on the floor or in the Chamber of Parliament. Refer to Articles 102, 104, etc.
Similarly, on the 22nd of February 2014, this House stood adjourned when the issue of lack of quorum was raised by Hon. Afenyo-Markin.
Again, on the 9th of November 2018, it was Hon. K.T Hammond raised the issue of lack of quorum in the House during the consideration of the RTI Bill.
On 20th November 2019, Rt. Hon. Speaker Prof. Ocquaye suspended sitting after the Hon. Mahama Ayariga indicated that the House did not have the numbers to continue the debate on the 2020 Budget.
Again, in this instance, the issue of quorum was raised by a member during the proceedings.
Members, what the precedents tell us, and they abound, is that the issue of lack of quorum is usually raised by a Member of the House or the Speaker himself having regard to the numbers in the House may ask for an adjournment or suspension of sitting due to the absence of a quorum.
Members’, staging a walk-out is a legitimate form of protest and is part of our Parliamentary norms and practices. Indeed, there have been several walk-outs since 1997 and each side of the aisle has used it as a legitimate tool to register their displeasure with one issue or the other.
The staging of a walk-out, however, does not render Parliament incapable of performing its functions.
Hon Members, may I refer to three (3) instances where walkouts and boycotts have been deployed and the business of the House has continued despite the walkouts.
On August 22, 2003, the Minority staged a boycott of the House in protest against the NHIA Bill. Business of the House continued despite the boycott. The total number of majority members used to justify a quorum was the number 101, recorded on the Votes and proceedings of the day and not the number on the floor.
On the 23rd of February 2005, the Minority staged a walkout of the House because of the consideration of the Customs & Excise Petroleum Taxes Bill. Despite the walkout, proceedings continued and the quorum relied upon was the number of members recorded on the Votes and Proceedings as a present, including names of the minority who had all walked out.
On the 19th November 2014, the Minority staged another walk out of the chamber because of the Bill on the introduction of 17.5% Special Petroleum Tax levy. Again, despite the walkout, Votes, and proceedings recorded 274 members present which was more than half of all members to take decisions of the day.
It suffices to note that, the failure to register an objection for a lack of quorum meant any decision to be taken in respect of the purported absence of a quorum should have had regard for the numbers as enunciated in the Votes and Proceedings of the House on the said date.
The actions of the House on Tuesday 30th November 2021 bring into sharp focus the powers of a Deputy Speaker vis a vis that of the Speaker.
On that day, the First Deputy Speaker of Parliament presiding found that the vote taken on the 26th of November rejecting the budget was null and void as the requisite number was not present by Article 104 of the Constitution.
The decision was taken on the 30th of November 2021 which decision suggested I acted ultra vires the Constitution when I put the question on the 2022 Budget Statement and Economic Policy of Government appears strange to me. The House was duly constituted for its work for business and voting by Articles 102 and 104 respectively and the public record of the Votes and Proceedings of the House on the 26th of November lends credence to this position.
Source: Mybrytnewsroom.com/Kofi Atakora
