Former Supreme Court Judge, Justice William Atuguba, has criticised the Supreme Court’s handling of the parliamentary vacant seat case, arguing that it overstepped its bounds.

In an interview with JoyNews on November 12, he stated that the issue should have been directed to the High Court, not the Supreme Court.

Justice Atuguba explained that the Constitution provides specific guidelines regarding judicial authority over parliamentary vacancies. Citing Article 130 clauses 1 and 2, he emphasized the legal principle verba generalia specialibus non derogant, meaning that general provisions should not override specific ones.

• Read also: Supreme Court rules: Speaker’s declaration of four seats vacant is unconstitutional

According to him, Article 130 offers general provisions, but the Constitution explicitly designates the High Court to handle matters regarding vacant seats in Parliament.

This, he argued, means that the Supreme Court should not encroach on the High Court’s jurisdiction in such cases.

He added that the Supreme Court has referential jurisdiction “that is to say this matter which is vacant seat is for the High Court.”

Justice Atuguba further clarified that if a legal ambiguity regarding constitutional interpretation arises in such cases, the High Court should refer only that specific issue to the Supreme Court, rather than the entire case.

He criticised Majority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin for bypassing the High Court and taking the case directly to the Supreme Court, adding that if he had presided over the case, he would have referred it to the High Court.

However, the Chairman of the Constitutional and Legal Committee of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Frank Davies, has disagreed with the former Supreme Court Justice's critique of the Supreme Court’s handling of the parliamentary vacancy case.

In an interview on Joy FM's Top Story, Mr Davies expressed concern over Atuguba’s public comments, noting that it was premature for the former Justice to speak on the matter, describing it as worrying.

“I would have expected that Justice Atuguba would have waited for the reasoning judgment before making this pronouncement. It doesn’t do our justice system any good…I find it very worrying,” he said.