By Clement Akoloh
Accra, August 27, 2026 — Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin has led members of the Minority Caucus on the Appointments Committee to walk out of the vetting of Supreme Court nominees, accusing the Majority of abandoning parliamentary principles it defended while in opposition.
The walkout followed a disagreement over the procedure being used by the Committee to proceed with the vetting of the nominees.
Mr. Afenyo-Markin insisted that the Minority was not opposed to the nominees but was challenging what he described as an improper process that was inconsistent with established parliamentary practice.
“That’s not the way to treat your ranking. That’s not the way to treat your ranking. No. I’m not in the majority. We are only asking you to respect your own principles. Your principles in 2024 and nothing more,” he said.
He accused the Majority of selectively applying principles it had previously championed when it was in opposition, arguing that those principles should not become irrelevant simply because the political circumstances had changed.
“If you insist, because you are the majority, the very things that you said when you were in opposition, they are no more relevant. And under Reset you have set in place a new rule,” he said.
‘Discrimination jurisprudence’
The Minority Leader also rejected an argument of discrimination reportedly advanced in support of the Majority’s position.
He accused Majority Leader Mahama Ayariga of invoking the authority of the Chief Justice and constitutional or parliamentary jurisprudence selectively when confronted with difficult procedural questions.
“This argument of discrimination that you have discovered is again serving your convenience,” Mr. Afenyo-Markin said.
He further alleged that the Majority Leader had developed what he sarcastically described as “discrimination jurisprudence” by relying on the Chief Justice in circumstances where it suited the Majority’s position.
According to him, the Chairman of the Appointments Committee did not possess the authority to make the kind of determination being sought in the matter.
“I know that there is no set power given to the Chairman to make a ruling. You know it,” he argued.
He described the development as unfair and improper, insisting that the Minority’s position was based on parliamentary procedure rather than an attempt to frustrate the nominees.
“Chairman, what is happening is unfair. It is improper,” he said.
‘We cannot be part’
Mr. Afenyo-Markin subsequently announced that the Minority would not participate in the process under the procedure adopted by the Majority.
“We are sorry. We cannot be part,” he declared.
He, however, made it clear that the Minority’s decision to walk out should not be interpreted as opposition to the Supreme Court nominees themselves.
“To the nominees, with regard to you, we respect you and we are not opposed to your nomination, but the process being used by the Majority is not known to the parliamentary jurisprudence that we all know,” he said.
The Minority Leader’s comments brought the Committee’s proceedings to a dramatic point as Minority members left the vetting.
The dispute adds a fresh procedural dimension to the ongoing parliamentary consideration of the Supreme Court nominations, with the Minority maintaining that the Majority must adhere to principles and procedures it itself defended before assuming power.
The Majority, however, maintains its position on the procedure and the interpretation of the relevant parliamentary principles, setting the stage for further debate over the powers of the Appointments Committee and its leadership in handling preliminary procedural objections.
Source: parliamentnews360.com
