Member of Parliament for Bolgatanga East, Dr. Dominic Akuritinga Ayine says Parliament has been fleshing out the Parliamentary Privileges and Immunities portion of the House’s standing orders.

According to him, this has become necessary to stomp out any confusion that may arise concerning the limitations of the Parliamentary Privileges and Immunities and to clearly define what constitutes a breach of privileges.

He stated that previously, Parliament has been responsible for determining what actions constitute a breach of privileges, however, the House is currently determining whether to make the standing order justiciable.

“We have the new standing orders that are coming before the house and those orders have actually been deliberated upon by the committee of which I am chairman that is the subsidiary legislative committee. And we’re fleshing out the Privileges and Immunities portion.

“But you’d realise that the standing orders are made pursuant to Parliament’s power to regulate its internal matters. We always say that Parliament is a master of its own procedure, and so we’re fleshing them out in the standing orders.

“Now the question is whether the standing orders are justiciable, for instance in situations where let’s say the IGP arrests a Member of Parliament in a manner that is in breach of the standing orders when they’re passed. Can there be a resort to court for purposes of let’s say determine whether or not there has been a breach of privilege?” he said on JoyFM’s Super Morning Show, October 4.

His comments follow the contention concerning the interpretation of Articles 117 and 118 by Parliament, the Ghana Police Service, and other legal experts.

Whereas legal experts including Dr. Kofi Abotsi, Kweku Paintsil, Ace Ankomah, and Samson Lardy Anyenini have argued that the Ghana Police Service is not duty-bound to seek Parliamentary approval prior to arresting an MP, Parliament argues otherwise.

This has been interpreted by some legal experts to indicate that Parliament may be overextending its parliamentary privileges.

In relation to this, Dr. Akuritinga Ayine explains that after the successful fleshing out of the Privileges and Immunities standing orders, it will finally put to rest these arguments.

He stated that he actually prefers having Parliament make the determination whether an act by the executive is in breach of Parliamentary privileges or not.

“Usually the determination as to whether there has been a breach of privilege is one that has been determined by parliament itself. So I would prefer that procedure rather than have a situation where we’re subjecting the interpretation of 117, 118 to a determination by the Supreme Court. 

“Because at the end of the day when the court has elaborated the parameters of the constitution, in terms of implementation it will come back to the same parliament of Ghana in terms of how we deal with the executive branch when it comes to the issues of arrest, serving as a witness in court and so on and so forth,” he said.

He also suggested that the Privileges and Immunities standing orders could be passed as an act of Parliament to ensure that the courts can determine whether an action is in breach of parliamentary privileges.

“The alternative will also be what the Australians have done and in other jurisdictions to pass an act of parliament on parliamentary immunities and privileges that way you’ll subject the statutes justiciability before the court.

“So that whenever there is a matter to be determined with respect to whether or not a Member of Parliament enjoys a certain privilege or is immune from a certain process, then it will be determined within the confines of that statute,” he said.

He added that “I think that usually, we tend to want to resort to court interpretation but sometimes the courts may even end up confiscating the situation making it more confusing for us.”