For adding himself to the 137 MPs of the Majority Caucus on Tuesday, 30 November 2021 and by virtue of that claiming there were 138 MPs in the house and, thus, going ahead to pass the 2022 budget even though he was presiding over the business of the day in the absence of Speaker Alban Bagbin, Minority Leader Haruna Iddrisu has said his side is disappointed in the conduct of First Deputy Speaker Joe Osei-Owusu.
“The Majority say they respect the Constitution and the standing orders of the house. Today, I am particularly disappointed in the conduct of the First Deputy Speaker having to include himself and to exercise himself in order to meet their mandatory defined 138 without recourse or respect to the standing orders and the 1992 Constitution; standing order 109 is on voting”, Mr Iddrisu complained to journalist right after the passage of the budget.
The Minority Caucus boycotted the sitting.
Prior to voting on the budget, Mr Osei-Owusu also set aside the earlier rejection of the budget during Friday’s sitting which had Mr Bagbin presiding over the business of the house.
He said Mr Bagbin erred by allowing 137 Minority MPs to vote on the budget on Friday.
“My attention has been drawn to the record, page 10 of the Votes and Proceedings of Friday, which showed that the confirmed number of the Members of Parliament at the time the question was presented was less than half of the Members of Parliament”.
“Records show that 137 members were present”.
“That is less than half of the full Members of Parliament”, he said.
He noted: “Article 104 and our standing order clearly spell out the process of decision-making in the house”.
“It clearly states that a question shall not be put on any matter unless at least half of the members are present in Parliament.”
“The Speaker appeared not to have paid attention to the Constitution and procedural provision”.
“I’m certain that given his expertise, he would not have made this error if his attention was drawn to it”.
“The consequence of this unfortunate error is that it is void and inconsequential since it was done in violation of Article 104 (1) of the constitution.”