It is a zinger to register that, upon Bagbin's expansive experience as a parliamentarian, he is sans the decency of 'altruism'. Altruism was prognosticated to bracket with left-wing attitudes due to an overlap, regarding perturbations for social equality, and a discrepancy between well-known hallmarks of right-wingers and altruistic individuals, discretely.

Moreover, altruism was banked on to get across sui generis variance in political orientation beyond the ‘Big Six’ (i. e ;(Honesty-Humility, Emotionality, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Openness to Experience ) broad dimensions as it allies with angles not covered by the latter.

Both postulates were sampled in a web-based questionnaire study (N = 137). Besides, replicating discoveries of previous research, results corroborated a rugged buoyant association between altruism and left-wing attitudes, and altruism was observed to deem for substantial incongruity in political orientation after ruling the roost for the HEXACO factors of personality ( a model of personality developed by Ashton and Lee (2007) and Lee and Ashton, 2004, Lee and Ashton, 2006 ).

It was rounded off that, altruism is a paramount construct, which warrants the spotlight whenever political attitudes or other topics relating to social equality are at stake.

Vis-à-vis the influence of personality, much attention has been donated to the so-called five-factor model of personality (e.g., Caprara, Barbaranelli, & Zimbardo, 1999). According to this approach, neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness – conventionally alluded to, as the Big Five – are projected to provide a broad rendition of individual asymmetries in affect, cognition, and behaviour (e.g., McCrae & Costa, 1999).

Of those five rudimentary dimensions, openness to experience is most consistently married to political inclinations (e.g., Van Hiel, Kossowska, & Mervielde, 2000) and experiential openness was told apart by McCrae (1996) as ‘the major psychological determinant of political polarities’ (p. 325).

In this facet, the parliamentary experience of Alban Bagbin has been proportionately frangible and skanky. For Alban Bagbin to masquerade that, the Supreme Court cannot set the constitutional tones for Parliament is the eldritch crock ever. It is creepy and cranky as to why, Alban Bagbin intends to execrate, pooh-pooh and animadvert on the constitutional mandates of the Supreme Court in relation to its fiat pronounced _ it has therefore, provided enough oxygen to the fact that, he is trying to mollify his parochial partisan political interests, which in this case, doesn't presage well for the constitutional uprightness.

The Supreme Court, being the summit court of a country, every constitutional nebulousness in parliament/congress is submitted to their end for the sake of exposition and above-board elucidation. On 24th February 1803, William Marbury, a Federalist Party leader from Maryland petitioned the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus to compel Madison to act when he didn't receive his commission before Jefferson became president in a legal case, dubbed, Marbury v Madison.

The U.S. Supreme Court first vented an act of Congress unconstitutional, thus establishing the doctrine of judicial review. The court’s opinion, written by Chief Justice John Marshall, is considered one of the foundations of U.S. constitutional law. This presents to us, how the Supreme Court has the ultimate legal muscle in such cases _ but quite flabbergastingly, Alban Bagbin is disinclined to cede to the Supreme Court's ruling, not because of chariness, but to accomplish his contracted partisan assignments.

A uniform case came to light during the 2nd Parliament, whereas, Alban Bagbin was an MP and the Supreme Court exercised its constitutional jurisdiction, thus interpreting a lump of the constitution then. After Mr. J. H. Mensah, being the leader of the opposition New Patriotic Party had heard that, Kwame Peprah, who had been retained as Minister of Finance would present the budget on Friday 7 February 1997, he filed a subpoena at the Supreme Court to provocate the cogency of the President’s appointment of Mr. Peprah without landing the approval of Parliament.

The writ filed by Mr. J. H. Mensah sought from the Supreme Court; a true and proper interpretation of the constitution, predominantly, Articles 57(3), 58(1) & (3), 66(1), 76(1) & (2), 78(1), 79(1), 80, 81, 97(1)(a), 100(1), 113(1) & (3) and most notably, Article 78 (1), since the whole matter was pivoting on the equation of "Approval" with "Vetting".

In view of J. H. Mensah's writ, the parliament steered by Justice Daniel Francis Annan determined that Mr. Peprah could not read the Budget and pigeonholed the matter. Subsequently, the Speaker, Justice D. F. Annan apprised the then-president, Flt. Lt. (rtd) Jerry John Rawlings that, until the up-in-the-air issue before the Supreme Court was manipulated, although he had wrangle with J. H. Mensah, he couldn't proceed to honour his ministerial appointments, since it would be inimical to the constitution.

This is a cut-down decipherment of the constitution, where every MP is supposed to absorb without a jot of obfuscation. This constitutional provision is at Alban Bagbin's fingertips _ so, the subsequent question being asked by people is, then, why is he not servile to the ruling of the Supreme Court yet? It is as easy as pie _ he has adopted an oleaginous approach to do the political bidding for his Party.

It is a bald fact that the Supreme Court is meant to gloss the Constitution, which is why, Rockson - Nelson Dafeamekpor essayed for the interpretations of a parcel of the Constitution at the Supreme Court, when the unrivalled president, H. E. Nana Akufo Addo wanted to reshuffle and reassign itemized individuals with disparate positions within his Ministerial circle, although the Court deemed it impolitic proposition by the said MP.

In fact, I was chagrined, when I heard the Minority Leader, Ato Forson and the Deputy Minority Chief Whip, Ahmed Ibrahim denigrating the constitutional faculties of the Supreme Court in this case!

Also, the twine that, Alban Bagbin activated precedence amidst his vacancy declaration is very droll and clownish. What materialized under the tutelage of Prof. Aaron Mike Oquaye is diametrically opposed to this one, such that ;

I) The Standing Orders of Parliament have been repositioned and revamped.
II) The General Secretary of the NPP wrote to him for the forfeiture of Hon. Andrew Asiamah as a member of the Party: this exercise was founded on Section 2 of the Parliamentary Act, 1965 (Act, 300), which weights on "Tenure of Membership" and room for rescript of possible " Vacancies " in Parliament. It is demonstrated below :
2) A member shall cease to be a member, if;

a) An event occurs whereby he becomes a person such as is mentioned in the table contained in Section 1 (highlights about physical handicaps, criminalities, immoralities etc); or

b) the Speaker receives a notice signed by him, whereby he resigns his seat; or
c) he is expelled from the Assembly under section 37 of this Act (it focuses on guilty of conduct); or

d) the Speaker receives a notice signed by a majority of the registered electors in the electoral district in which such Member was elected that he no longer enjoys the confidence and support of the electorate in that district, provided that in the case of a Member who is a Member of the party, the notice is received by the Speaker through the General Secretary of the party; and

e) the Speaker receives a notice signed by the General Secretary of the party that, the Member who was elected to the National Assembly as a Member of the party has ceased to be a Member of the party.

f) the Speaker receives a notice signed by the General Secretary of the Party that the Member who was elected to the National Assembly as a member of the Party no longer enjoys the confidence and support of the Party; or

g) in the course of the proceedings of the Assembly, he publicly declares his intention of systematically refraining from attending the proceedings of the Assembly, and the Speaker or other person presiding confirms that the Member made that declaration in his hearing.

Assessing the scene rigorously in this case, none of Hon. Kwadjo Asante nor Hon. Cynthia Mamle Morrison has given the nod to any of the preceding legal contexts: they aren't physically challenged or blighted by either immorality or criminal chronicle, per Section 2(a); they haven't bowed out as MPs, as entreated by Section 2(b); they don't have any record of behavioural guiltiness, as proposed by Section 2(c) ;

the Speaker hasn't welcomed any official notice signed by the General Secretary of NPP, as conveyed in Section 2 (d)(e)(f) and eventually, none of the said MP has communicated to any of the Speaker publicly, chiefly, Alban Bagbin that, he/she has relinquished on attending to parliamentary duties in a palpable harbinger to counsel that, the person is no more drawn parallel with the party he/she was elected as an MP, as indicated in Section 2 (g).

However, it was pants for the Speaker to declare those seats " vacant ", having cited Prof. Oquaye's precedence as a convention. As I do say, constitutional or legal matters are apprehended to the nines through the application of common sense, because that's the language of law, hence a kind of that needed to be evaluated first by Alban Bagbin, before he made that weirdest pronouncement.

Moreover, the endeavour being made by Kwadjo Asante and Cynthia Mamle Morrison to vie for the parliamentary position as independent candidates is supposed to take effect on any ' future ' parliamentary elections and not their present status since they came to parliament on the ticket of a specified political party and not as independent candidates _ such is a twin of common sense also.

This bolsters why, on 18th October 2012 when Hon. Michael Teye Nyuanu, the then NDC MP for Lower Manya Krobo after having filed to jockey for parliamentary position as an 'independent candidate ' and the NDC Party didn't turf him out of the Party, the then Speaker, Rt. Hon. Doe-Adjaho couldn't vouch for his seat as 'vacant'.

Therefore, in nosing around for precedence as a touchstone, this was supposed to be used instead, since it has got the same complexion. But partisan political interests didn't greenlight Alban Bagbin to rationalize to that length - sepulchral!

The temerarious decision of Alban Bagbin to take five from parliamentary sitting sine die will make the country's budding economy be up a gum tree. Parliament is a clime which defines the framework of a country through its mathematical policies, therefore, having frozen Parliament till the cows come home will in a way, nixes the headway of the economy agonizingly.

Quite recently, a chapter of bills has been drafted before Parliament for imminent passage of them to become laws also, inclusive of most saliently, " the Revocation of the Legislative Instrument (L. I) 2462 bill ".

This propounded revocation aims to banish the legal skeleton which permits mining in forest reserves. The revocation of L.I. 2462 would consequently lead to a total interdiction of any mining activities within the forest reserves. Also, according to Article 11(7) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the proposed Instrument must be laid before Parliament and will come into effect after 21 sitting days unless it is annulled by a two-thirds majority vote of Members of Parliament (MPs).

For urgency sake, which is why, in a communication dated October 10, 2024, the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Godfred Yeboah Dame esq, formally notified the Clerk of Parliament about the new L.I. and advocated that it be laid before the legislative body.

Haplessly, here comes a situation, whereby the stonyhearted Speaker has adjourned sitting of Parliament until the twelfth of never, based on a groundless ground. I was very charmed, when I read that, my learned parliamentarian and the Deputy Majority Chief Whip, Hon. Alex Tetteh Djornobuah has written to the Speaker to resume the hiatus on Parliament, backed with the required provisions under the aegis of the unflagging Majority Chief Whip, Hon. Frank Annoh - Dompreh and on the ball Majority Leader, Hon. Alexander Kwamina Afenyo - Markin.

I am therefore, calling on the indulgence of the " violent kisser ", Ransford Gyampo to stage nationwide hartal against the Speaker this time round for causing deferment on the passage of that bill through his unresolved prorogation, in order for Gyampo's de profundis of abbreviating the activities of Galamsayers become actualized.

Alban Bagbin should be in the epiphany that, he is the Speaker of Parliament and however, his supposed power doesn't exceed the powers of the Supreme Court, apropos the interpretation of the constitution and other legal cases. It is all right to reckon that, his bull-headed behaviour has been berated by the veteran legal practitioners, Justice Atuguba Esq and Martin Amidu Esq. It is material for Alban Bagbin to show obsequious to the decision of the Supreme Court in order to enable a healthy cessation of the 8th Parliament.