Majority Chief Whip in Parliament, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, has rejected claims that the accelerated vetting of three Supreme Court nominees is unjustified because there is currently no vacancy on the apex court.
Majority Chief Whip in Parliament, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, has rejected claims that the accelerated vetting of three Supreme Court nominees is unjustified because there is currently no vacancy on the apex court.
According to him, the nominees were not put forward to replace any justice who had retired, died or left office, but rather in response to the workload confronting the Supreme Court.
Speaking on Joy FM’s Top Story on Thursday, August 27, Mr Dafeamekpor said the President’s decision to nominate the three justices was based on recommendations from the Judicial Council and the need to strengthen the capacity of the apex court.
“The judges were not appointed because there was a vacancy. That was not what the president said. The President communicated to Parliament that, given the exigencies of the workload facing the Supreme Court, it would be important that these nominees be quickly vetted and confirmed for purposes of appointment,” he said.
Mr Dafeamekpor said the nominations were also part of the specific business for which Parliament was recalled.
He noted that the House had been summoned to deal with three key matters: the passage of an urgent bill, the vetting and approval of two ministerial nominees, and the vetting and approval or otherwise of the three Supreme Court nominees.
The South Dayi MP, therefore, questioned the minority’s decision to accept the suspension of the applicable rules for the ministerial nominees while opposing a similar arrangement for the judicial nominees.
According to him, the decision to expedite the process was not taken unilaterally by the majority, as the business committee, which includes representatives from both sides of the House, had considered and proposed the business for the week.
He said concerns raised by Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin during plenary were debated but did not command majority support.
“It is inappropriate for anybody to say that when I make a point on the floor and the majority of the House disagrees with my position, I must still go out and canvass it as if it’s a position of the law,” he argued.
Mr Dafeamekpor further cited the 2024 vetting of then Energy Minister-designate Herbert Krapa to support the majority’s position that Parliament has previously expedited the consideration of nominees by waiving applicable procedural requirements.
He said the communication on Mr Krapa’s nomination reached Parliament on a Wednesday, he was vetted on Thursday, his approval report was considered on Friday, and he was subsequently confirmed by the President on Saturday.
He argued that the same principle was being applied in the current process.
The Majority Chief Whip also accused the Minority Leader of inconsistency, recalling that two Supreme Court nominees were approved under the previous administration, but their reports were allegedly not laid before Parliament for consideration.
Mr Dafeamekpor questioned why the minority was now raising procedural concerns over the current nominations after participating in parliamentary processes involving judicial appointments.
His comments come amid a heated disagreement between the majority and minority over the pace of the vetting of the three Supreme Court nominees, with the minority insisting that the absence of a vacancy means there is no justification for rushing the process.
