Vice President of IMANI Africa, Kofi Bentil, says the Majority Leader’s decision to petition the Supreme Court instead of the High Court regarding the vacant seats was a prudent one.

According to him, the Supreme Court has clearly demonstrated its approach to constitutional interpretation through detailed analyses of past cases.

He made these remarks on Joy FM’s Super Morning Show on Friday, November 15.

Mr. Bentil explained that “I have heard many people say this was very clear, everybody understands what it says, and so there is no doubt about it and it shouldn’t have even gone to the Supreme Court.”

“That is totally debunked, it is debunked even on the fact before it went to court that certain people disagreed. The fact that you have a view, and I have a different view, showed clearly that there needed to be somebody to break that jam.”

According to Kofi Bentil, the Supreme Court was properly invoked because there was a disagreement.

He further refuted the argument that the case should be taken to the High Court instead of taking the issue up to the level of the apex court.

“There was a point that it should go straight to the High Court, and if the High Court felt there was a problem with interpretation, then they refer it to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court deals with the interpretation, then it’s referred back to the High Court to finish the matter,” he stated.

He argued that the Supreme Court can assert jurisdiction and deal with cases of interpretation issues.

Referencing the Supreme Court’s ruling, Kofi Bentil cited Page 33, which, according to him, emphasized an earlier point he made at the beginning of the interview.

“When, in one case, you have matters of interpretation, and then other matters which are specifically given to a High Court, the Supreme Court must necessarily take it. We don’t want a situation where it goes there and comes back, and goes there again, wasting everybody’s time and going back and forth.” He explained.

He went on to reaffirm the Supreme Court’s assumption of jurisdiction on the matter. According to him, the case could have gone to the High Court if there was no interpretation issue. With the Supreme Court being the highest court of the land, he asserted that it is important for it to assume its jurisdiction.

In response to Justice Tanko Amadu’s conviction that the jurisdiction of the High Court has been usurped, via a text during the show:

“Well, clearly, the majority disagree with him,” he rebutted.

Kofi Bentil continued by citing Page 12 of the court’s ruling and reiterated that it is not novel, as stated in the ruling.

He recounted a situation where Parliament was in chaos, and there was a clear interpretation of the Constitution.

“And so, for the Supreme Court to assume it, with all due respect, was the sensible thing to do, and that is what they did,” he concluded.