The flagbearer of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), John Dramani Mahama, has voiced his opinion that the current parliamentary impasse could have been resolved through alternative measures rather than court intervention.

Addressing the clergy in Kumasi on Monday, 11 November, Mahama highlighted the value of dialogue and negotiation in managing political disagreements, stressing that collaboration would have been a more productive approach.

Mahama’s remarks come amid a heated legal battle over the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin’s, declaration of four parliamentary seats as vacant.

• Read also: I’ll never sit in the Minority Leader’s seat; it isn’t good spiritually – Afenyo-Markin

This decision, which has ignited significant political discourse, was initially made by Speaker Bagbin based on claims that the affected MPs had breached constitutional requirements.

Following this ruling, the Supreme Court stepped in, suspending the Speaker’s directive pending a final decision.

The court’s verdict on this matter is expected on Tuesday, 12 November 2024, an announcement that will be closely monitored by both political actors and the general public.

In his address, Mahama suggested that a court ruling should not have been necessary if open dialogue had been pursued, proposing that mediation could have prevented the issue from escalating to this level.

The former President underlined that political disputes are best settled through communication, as it fosters unity and avoids the divisive consequences of legal confrontations.

Mahama added that resorting to judicial means could set an unhealthy precedent for future parliamentary disagreements.

In his view, resolving matters internally demonstrates a commitment to collaboration and a dedication to strengthening Ghana’s democratic fabric.

By advocating for dialogue, Mahama is urging the government and other political stakeholders to prioritise amicable solutions, reinforcing his belief that Ghana’s democratic progress relies on cooperation over conflict.

“I think that it is something we can solve politically. The solution is not legal because the Supreme Court can make a decision and Parliament would say we are not under you, we are a separate arm of government. So, this would have demanded a political solution. But all that is dependent on the president."

“If I were a president, I would have taken the case out of the Supreme Court and called both sides and their leaders and Council of State and the speaker to resolve the matter because I believe if that is done there would be a resolution to the matter,” he asserted.