Bagbin Rules Parliamentary Inquiry Inadmissible Over Pending Court Cases.

According to the Speaker, allowing the inquiry to proceed could require Parliament to examine transactions, assess the conduct of various actors and determine the reasons behind certain actions taken or opposed at Ghana’s ports of entry.

He explained that such an exercise could ultimately result in Parliament determining issues that properly fall within the jurisdiction of a court of competent jurisdiction.

“The combined effect of undertaking this evaluation, assessment, and investigation would be, at the end of the day, to determine the very issues that the Court of Competent Jurisdiction is supposed to determine,” Bagbin said.

Concern over pending court proceedings

The Speaker also expressed concern that proceeding with the parliamentary motion could potentially prejudice the interests of parties involved in the ongoing judicial proceedings.

He therefore concluded that the motion, in its current form, could not be admitted for consideration by the House.

“I therefore rule, pursuant to Standing Orders 5, 6, and 103, Sub-Rule F, that the Party Member’s motion is inadmissible,” Bagbin declared.

The ruling effectively prevents Parliament from proceeding with the proposed inquiry in its current form, while the related matters remain before the courts.

The decision highlights the constitutional and procedural boundaries between Parliament’s investigative functions and the authority of the judiciary to determine matters before the courts.