Home / Expert Answers / Operations Management / 1-it-is-the-year-2024-in-the-republic-of-kushia-and-the-essential-facts-about-kushia-are-coincident-pa850

(Solved): 1. It is the year 2024 in the Republic of Kushia and the essential facts about Kushia are coincident ...



1. It is the year 2024 in the Republic of Kushia and the essential facts about Kushia are coincidental with the facts about Ghana. The legal system and legal tradition of the Republic of Kushia are the same as that of the Republic of Ghana unless the same has been indicated to the contrary. 2. On May 10, 2024, the President of the Republic of Kusia, H.E. Nana Kweku Addo, and the Vice President, Dr. Afia Mensah, traveled to Rivana for a highlevel international summit. The summit, focusing on disaster management and climate resilience, was scheduled to last for five days. 3. Before their departure, the Speaker of Parliament, Hon. Kwabena Darko, was sworn in as Acting President pursuant to Article 55 of the Kusian Constitution, which provides for the Speaker to assume presidential duties in the absence of both the President and the Vice President. The swearing-in ceremony was widely televised and attended by key government officials. 4. The opposition and several civil society organizations criticized the swearing-in, arguing that it was unnecessary in the modern era, where technological advancements allow the President and Vice President to discharge their duties remotely, regardless of their physical location. They contended that this practice undermined the principle of separation of powers by concentrating executive powers in the hands of a legislative officer. 5. During his tenure as Acting President, Hon. Darko issued an Executive Order approving an emergency budget allocation of $10 million to combat the ongoing effects of severe flooding in the Northern Region. Critics argued that this exceeded the Speaker’s temporary powers under the Constitution and questioned whether an Acting President has the authority to issue such orders. 6. In a more controversial move, the Acting President also announced a significant reduction in the size of the government. Through another Executive Order, he dismissed 60 ministers from the cabinet, reducing the number of ministers from 100 to 40. The Acting President justified this decision as a measure to cut costs and improve efficiency during the emergency. 7. Upon the return of the President and Vice President, the President publicly rejected the dismissals, stating that the Acting President’s authority does not extend to reversing or altering ministerial appointments made by the President. The President directed the originally dismissed ministers to continue in their roles, claiming that their dismissal was legally invalid. 8. The opposition, however, argued that the dismissals were lawful, emphasizing that the Acting President exercises full executive authority during the absence of the President and Vice President under Article 55. They contended that the President could not retroactively nullify decisions taken by the Acting President. 9. Two weeks after the President and Vice President returned, the Peace and Liberation Party (the largest opposition party) held a press conference accusing the government of mismanaging public funds and bypassing parliamentary oversight in its handling of the emergency response. 10. Shortly afterward, the Minister for Finance, Mr. Mafu, presented a supplementary budget to Parliament for the year 2024. The budget requested an additional $10 million to pay Pilolo Company Ltd. for goods supplied under a special contract awarded during the emergency period. In the Memorandum of Agreed Issues file pursuant to the rules of the Court, the parties have called on the Court to decide: 1. Whether the swearing-in of the Speaker of Parliament as Acting President during the absence of the President and Vice President was constitutionally valid under Article 55 of the 1992 Constitution. 2. Whether on a true and proper interpretation of Articles 102 and 112 of the Constitution, the decision of the speaker to conduct a meeting via Zoom can be validly treated as a non-justiciable political question with deprived the Supreme Court of the jurisdiction to determine same. 3. Whether on a true and proper interpretation of Articles 102 and 112 of the Constitution, a meeting via Zoom can be validly treated as a session or meeting of Parliament. 4. Whether the swearing-in of the Speaker undermines the principle of separation of powers by allowing a legislative officer to assume executive functions and if so, whether such a violation is unconstitutional. 5. Whether the Constitution permits the Acting President to issue Executive Orders, particularly those involving emergency budgetary allocations and the dismissal of ministers. 6. Whether the President can nullify the dismissal of ministers by the Acting President upon returning to office. Giving Reference to the 1992 constitution of Ghana



We have an Answer from Expert

View Expert Answer

Expert Answer


We have an Answer from Expert

Buy This Answer $5

Place Order

We Provide Services Across The Globe