The Supreme Court has detailed its rationale for upholding the suit filed by Majority Leader, Alexander Afenyo-Markin.

According to the Court, a Member of Parliament (MP) is considered to have vacated their seat only if they change their political affiliation while remaining in Parliament under a new party identity.

In its ruling, which supported the Majority Leader’s position, the Court clarified that Articles 97(1)(g) and (h) of the Constitution apply strictly to the current parliamentary term.

These provisions are not relevant to future terms, such as when an MP decides to stand for election under a different party in subsequent elections.

The Supreme Court highlighted that an MP must vacate their seat if they switch parties during their tenure in Parliament, while still serving as a representative of the new party.

The Court’s judgment indicates that the constitutional provisions in question are specific to the present term of Parliament, emphasising that they do not address an MP’s political choices for future election cycles.

Below is the full ruling