Lawyer Samson Anyenini – Adomonline.com http://34.58.148.58 Your comprehensive news portal Tue, 04 Feb 2025 12:48:53 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 http://34.58.148.58/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/cropped-Adomonline140-32x32.png Lawyer Samson Anyenini – Adomonline.com http://34.58.148.58 32 32 Samson Anyenini’s take on parliamentary chaos [Listen] http://34.58.148.58/samson-anyeninis-take-on-parliamentary-chaos-listen/ Tue, 04 Feb 2025 12:48:53 +0000 https://www.adomonline.com/?p=2500573 Legal practitioner Samson Lardy Anyenini has reacted to the brouhaha surrounding the suspension of four Members of Parliament (MPs) following the chaotic incident at the Appointments Committee sitting.

Lawyer Anyenini stated that the suspension of the MPs is in the right direction, in line with general standard practice.

However, in an interview on Adom FM’s Dwaso Nsem, he expressed concerns about the ad-hoc committee set up to probe the incident.

He acknowledged that, in a normal corporate structure, such an incident would have been referred to a disciplinary committee, which, in Speaker Bagbin’s view, is the same as the ad-hoc committee.

However, the host of JoyNews’ New File argued that the move by the Speaker contravenes the law, stating that the standing orders clearly stipulate that the Privileges Committee should handle matters of misconduct.

“The suspension of the MPs is in the right direction, but the probe by the bipartisan committee is problematic because the standing orders are clear that misconduct should be referred to the Privileges Committee,” he said.

He continued, “The argument that the committee doesn’t exist is invalid because the bipartisan committee was also just set up, and the same could have been done with the Privileges Committee.”

Despite this perspective, the legal practitioner emphasized that it is not for a party to fail to comply with a directive simply because the Speaker erred.

“I have read the law and the parliamentary act, but I didn’t see where the Speaker’s authority emanated from. But you can’t say his directive contravenes the law, so you won’t comply. If a judge makes a declaration and there is an error, you can’t say you won’t comply; instead, there are procedures you follow to seek redress,” he noted.

Lawyer Anyenini further asserted that the incident occurred at a committee meeting, not in Parliament. Therefore, the Appointments Committee Chairman, Bernard Ahiafor, should have taken charge.

Meanwhile, the Minority in Parliament has announced that they will not participate in the committee’s hearing, which is expected to start on Wednesday, February 5, 2025.

Suame MP, John Darko, explained that the standing orders only allow for a committee to be set up through a motion raised by the leaders of either side, which must then be seconded by the House. At that point, the Speaker would play a role in approving the establishment of the committee, but the procedures were not followed.

ALSO READ:

 

]]>
Voters cannot be punished for voluntarily disclosing their vote – Lawyer Anyenini http://34.58.148.58/voters-cannot-be-punished-for-voluntarily-disclosing-their-vote-lawyer-anyenini/ Tue, 03 Dec 2024 13:01:58 +0000 https://www.adomonline.com/?p=2478552 Renowned media lawyer and host of Joy News’ Newsfile, Samson Lardy Anyenini, has explained that a citizen’s vote is meant to be kept secret, but that a voluntary disclosure of one’s vote cannot be punished under the law.

According to him, the law ensures the secrecy of a voter’s choice, with sanctions for election officials who fail to uphold this protection.

He stressed that the constitutional provision safeguarding the secrecy of the vote exists to protect the individual voter and that it is the responsibility of election organisers to ensure no one can observe how someone votes.

Speaking on Joy FM’s Super Morning Show on Tuesday, December 3, lawyer Anyenini asserted: “If I voluntarily disclose my vote, I cannot be punished for voluntarily disclosing my vote.”

He further clarified that, regardless of how the law is interpreted, it does not extend to punishing the person the secrecy rules are designed to protect.

“The secrecy rule cannot be enforced against the person whose vote is meant to be protected if they choose to disclose it voluntarily,” he said.

Lawyer Anyenini also noted that public declarations of votes often occur after individuals vote, citing the example of exit polls in the United States.

“That is why we have exit polls, where people stand by waiting for you to vote. As soon as you vote, they ask you who you voted for, and you declare—’ I voted for Trump.’ By the close of voting, even though the votes have not been counted and declared, America already knows who has potentially won the election,” he said.

He concluded by referring to the constitutional definition of a crime: “A crime is what is prohibited by written law. The law must be written, and the offence must be prescribed. Which law can you refer to that says you are prohibited from doing what you just said?

ALSO READ:

]]>