Former Speaker warns against Executive overreach: Parliamentary privilege must shield opposition from state intimidation

Former Speaker of Parliament Prof. Aaron Mike Oquaye has raised serious concerns about the use of state machinery to intimidate or suppress opposition politicians, arguing that such conduct fundamentally weakens Ghana's constitutional framework.

Speaking on the principle of separation of powers, Prof. Oquaye emphasised that the Executive cannot selectively enforce laws or deploy state institutions against political opponents without compromising the delicate balance designed to protect democracy. He stressed that parliamentary privilege and constitutional protections must apply uniformly, regardless of which party is in power.

"You cannot have separation of powers in the Constitution if the Executive takes steps to shut up the opposition, and that harassment is not good," Prof. Oquaye said, underscoring the dangers of weaponising state agencies for partisan purposes.

The Ayariga case: A test of constitutional principle

Prof. Oquaye illustrated his argument by referencing his handling of a sensitive case during his tenure as Speaker involving former Bawku Central MP Mahama Ayariga, who faced investigations by the Office of the Special Prosecutor. Rather than allowing partisan considerations to dictate the outcome, Prof. Oquaye intervened to protect Ayariga's constitutional rights.

He revealed that he actively resisted what he viewed as improper attempts to prosecute the opposition MP, inviting the then Special Prosecutor to an open meeting to ensure procedures aligned with constitutional requirements. Prof. Oquaye documented his position in writing, establishing a clear record of his defence of parliamentary privilege.

"It is not a matter of NPP or NDC," Prof. Oquaye stressed, emphasising that constitutional protections transcend party lines. His intervention was motivated entirely by adherence to Ghana's founding law rather than political solidarity.

Why it matters for Ghana

Prof. Oquaye's remarks carry significant implications for Ghana's democratic health. The tension between executive power and opposition oversight is a recurring challenge in African democracies, where institutional strength often depends on the integrity of individual officeholders rather than robust checks and balances.

His warnings highlight a critical vulnerability: when state institutions—particularly prosecutorial bodies—become tools of the ruling party, they erode public confidence in the judiciary and weaken democratic competition. Opposition MPs facing politically motivated prosecution may become hesitant to scrutinise government, effectively silencing legitimate parliamentary oversight.

The case also demonstrates how parliamentary privilege serves as a protective mechanism for legislators, allowing them to speak freely without fear of retaliation. Without this shield, elected representatives become vulnerable to harassment, and Parliament's capacity to hold the Executive accountable diminishes.

Prof. Oquaye's historical analysis—tracing parliamentary privilege back to English constitutional tradition and examining historical infractions—suggests he views this principle as foundational to democratic governance. His detailed documentation of the Ayariga matter indicates an attempt to establish a precedent that future Speakers might reference when similar conflicts arise.

As Ghana navigates ongoing political tensions and questions about the use of prosecutorial power, Prof. Oquaye's intervention serves as a reminder that institutions—not individuals—must safeguard constitutional principles. The strength of Ghana's democracy ultimately depends on whether officeholders, regardless of party affiliation, prioritise constitutional governance over partisan advantage.