MPs Only Lose Seats for Party Change Within Parliamentary Term – Supreme Court
Supreme Court Clarifies Constitutional Limits on Party Switching and Seat Forfeiture for MPs During Current Parliamentary Term
- MPs lose their seats only if they change political parties during their current term
- Articles 97(1)(g) and (h) of the Constitution apply solely to the current parliamentary term
- An independent MP who joins a political party must vacate the seat originally held as an independent
The Supreme Court has issued a detailed explanation supporting its decision to uphold the suit filed by Majority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin, clarifying when a Member of Parliament (MP) may lose their seat.
According to the Court, an MP can be deemed to vacate their seat only if they change their political affiliation during their current term and continue serving in Parliament under the new affiliation.
This interpretation, as outlined in Articles 97(1)(g) and (h) of the Constitution, applies solely to the present parliamentary term and does not extend to future elections where an MP might stand under a different political ticket.
The Court emphasized that if an MP switches to a different party mid-term while intending to remain in office, they forfeit their seat. “Thus, the only logical conclusion from a holistic reading of Article 97(1)(g) and (h) is that an MP’s seat shall be vacated if they leave the party they were elected under to join another while staying in Parliament,” the ruling stated.
In a dissenting opinion, two Justices noted that an independent MP joining a political party would also have to vacate their seat held as an independent.
The Court further clarified that these constitutional provisions are relevant solely to the current term, not to future election pursuits or affiliations. “Therefore, Article 97(1)(g) and (h) must be understood within its present context and does not imply future aspirations or alignments, such as an MP contesting the next election with a different party,” the Court concluded.
