He dismissed objections raised by Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin, who claimed the Minority side had not endorsed the document.

The ruling followed heated exchanges on the floor over procedural fairness and the integrity of the vetting process.

Mr Afenyo-Markin had opposed the report’s presentation, insisting it lacked his side’s signatures and accusing the Committee of sidelining their inputs.

However, Chairman of the Appointments Committee, Bernard Ahiafor, countered that the Minority’s preliminary written comments had already been incorporated.

He revealed that Afenyo-Markin had submitted a last-minute request for further revisions this morning, which he deemed procedurally untenable.

After all these, the Speaker concluded that the report was duly prepared and vetted.

According to him, he is aware of what transpired prior to the report presentation, explaining that “you even sought my assistance in some of these matters in my conference room, and went through them together.”

“We thought we had settled them. Now they are being rehashed. I don’t think that is proper. When we are talking about a report of a committee, we are talking about the whole committee. We are not talking about individuals in certain things to suit their understanding of a report of the committee.”

Alban Bagbin added that the Minority will still have the opportunity to present its other concerns regarding the report when it’s laid before the house.

“Whatever you have to say, you can say it here on the floor as part of your contributions to the deliberations of the house. I will give you enough time to say it. We cannot expect the report to capture everything.

“Please. You will not be prevented from saying what you want to say. But when we talk about the report, we are talking about the report capturing the decision of the whole committee. That is what we are looking at. So please, I think the report is properly before the House and it will be presented. And it will be taken by this house today.”

ALSO READ:

• Speaker refers Supreme Court nominees to Appointments Committee

• Appointments Committee of Parliament suspends vetting of Supreme Court nominees

In an exclusive interview with JoyNews’ Elton Brobbey on The Pulse, Justice Atuguba said while some of Mahama’s appointments were deserving, the composition of the Court would have been stronger and more balanced with a wider range of professional backgrounds.

“Part of the judges appointed by Mahama are deserving, but I won’t absolve them completely either because when it comes to these things, you look at the nature of the court they are going to, the challenges they will face, their background and suitability,” he noted.

He explained that over the years, he had come to appreciate the value of drawing Supreme Court justices from a variety of sources, not just the bench. “I found that with these appointments, particularly to the Supreme Court, some should come from the Bar, very distinguished practitioners who are upright, some should come from academia, and some from the Court of Appeal. Then you have a balance,” he said.

Justice Atuguba pointed out that he himself was appointed to the Supreme Court directly from the Bar, as was former Chief Justice Sophia Akuffo. He argued that this kind of diversity strengthens the Court’s ability to handle its main constitutional responsibilities.

“The Supreme Court is basically a constitutional court. We don’t have it as such formally like South Africa, but the most important part of its jurisdiction is constitutional. They have exclusive authority in the interpretation and enforcement of the Constitution,” he stated.

He added that constitutional and administrative law matters, which dominate the Supreme Court’s work, are more theoretical and still evolving in many areas, unlike more straightforward matters like contracts. “So the academics, they are good at that because they are research people,” he said.

Justice Atuguba concluded by saying that he believes the current Court lacks that professional mix. “I find a problem in that you don’t have people from the Bar or academia. I want that Court to be balanced, because it has worked well in the past.

“I don’t know the background of these individuals, but what I want to say is that seniority, when it is bypassed, is wrong. But it is not just raw seniority. Competent seniority, when bypassed, is bad. Not just seniority for seniority’s sake, that doesn’t serve the country well,” he added.

ALSO READ:

• Galamsey: Parliament will review L.I. 2462 once formally presented – Afenyo-Markin

• Fifi Kwetey advocates for separation of parliamentary and ministerial roles

The three nominees, Henry Anthony Kwofie, Yaw Darko Asare, and Richard Adjei-Frimpong, currently serve on the Court of Appeal.

They have been nominated to fill vacant positions on the Supreme Court bench.

President Akufo-Addo emphasised the urgency of filling the vacancies in a letter to Parliament dated October 11, 2023.

The Appointments Committee, chaired by the First Deputy Speaker of Parliament, Joseph Osei Owusu, will oversee the vetting process and submit a report to the plenary for consideration.