Parliament was adjourned indefinitely on Tuesday, September 29, 2026, after Speaker Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin ruled a Minority motion seeking a parliamentary inquiry into major narcotics consignments linked to Ghana inadmissible, setting the stage for a fresh confrontation over Parliament’s oversight powers and the limits of judicial sub judice.
The House had been reconvened for an emergency sitting following a petition by Minority MPs over a series of high-profile narcotics seizures connected to Ghana. The motion, filed by First Deputy Minority Whip and Tolon MP Habib Iddrisu on September 28 and co-sponsored by eight other Minority MPs, sought the establishment of an ad hoc committee under Article 103 of the 1992 Constitution and Order 262 of Parliament’s Standing Orders to investigate how the consignments were processed, inspected, cleared and exported from Ghana.
The Speaker’s Ruling
Delivering his ruling after hours of debate, Bagbin said the proposed parliamentary inquiry substantially overlapped with ongoing criminal proceedings and could prejudice the interests of parties before the courts. “The proposed parliamentary enquiry will traverse factual matters directly connected with matters presently engaging the criminal justice process,” he said.
The Speaker cited the combined effect of the committee’s proposed terms of reference, which included examining the processing and clearance of consignments, the conduct of individuals and institutions involved, and the status of investigations and prosecutions. “The combined effect of undertaking this evaluation, assessment and investigation would be, at the end of the day, to determine the very issues that the Court of Competent Jurisdiction is supposed to determine,” he said. “Accordingly, I am of the considered opinion that permitting the motion to proceed in its present form as presented by a Leader of the House at this particular time may prejudice the interests of parties to pending judicial proceedings”.
He consequently invoked Standing Orders 5, 6 and 103, Sub-rule F, along with Orders 192 and 233, declaring the Private Member’s Motion inadmissible in limine.
The Seizures That Triggered the Motion
The motion cited a series of major narcotics interceptions linked to Ghana. Central to the case was the seizure of nearly 3.9 metric tonnes of cocaine by French Customs at Dunkirk on September 10, 2026. The consignment, valued by the motion at approximately US$261 million, had departed from Ghana’s Tema Port in four 40-foot containers. French authorities separately estimated its street value at €225 million.
The motion also cited the seizure of 320 kilogrammes of methamphetamine by the Australian Border Force on June 18, 2026, as well as cocaine interceptions in Takoradi and Pedu in Cape Coast in March 2025. The proposed committee would have investigated the circumstances under which the consignments were processed and cleared in Ghana, including the ports of departure and the intelligence profiling, scanning, physical inspection and customs procedures applied.
Six individuals, including four Customs Division staff of the Ghana Revenue Authority, have been arraigned before the Kwabenya Circuit Court over the 3.9-tonne cocaine shipment. They face charges of conspiracy to export narcotic drugs and unlawful exportation of narcotic drugs. The court denied them bail on September 29, 2026, and adjourned the case to October 20, 2026.
Minority Rejects Ruling, Vows to Fight On
Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin rejected the Speaker’s reasoning, describing the ruling as “a sad day for democracy and parliamentary oversight”. “Mr Speaker therefore got it wrong by using existing pending criminal proceedings to determine the scope and manner of the inquiry,” he told a press conference in Accra.
Afenyo-Markin argued that the motion did not seek to try any accused person or determine criminal liability, but rather to examine whether state institutions had effectively discharged their responsibilities. He cited Articles 93(2) and 103 of the 1992 Constitution, which vest legislative and oversight powers in Parliament, and Article 103(6), which grants parliamentary committees the powers of the High Court for compelling witnesses and requiring the production of documents.
“The proper question is not simply whether there is a case in court; the proper question is whether the particular parliamentary enquiry would prejudice a determination of that case,” he said. He also criticised the Majority Caucus for supporting the ruling, saying: “The 24-hour economy has turned into 24-hour cocaine, and the Majority is not at all interested in scrutiny; we will not rest”.
The Minority Leader said the caucus would explore other options under the Constitution and Standing Orders to keep the matter on the national agenda. “We say that we are left with another option, we would exercise an option within the Constitution and our own standing orders in ensuring that this narcotic issue, which has gotten out of hand and has gotten Ghana to gain notoriety as a transshipment point of narcotics back onto the front burner. We will not let this matter rest”.
Speaker Keeps Oversight Door Open
Bagbin clarified that his ruling was procedural and did not bar Parliament from examining narcotics-related issues in the future. “I am not ruling that Parliament can never enquire into these matters, and neither am I suggesting that the matters raised by the requesting members are unimportant,” he said.
He outlined several avenues MPs could pursue without conducting a parallel fact-finding exercise, including seeking information from Ministers, scrutinising the performance of relevant public institutions, examining the adequacy of narcotics-control legislation and considering broader issues concerning port security, national security and narcotics policy.
The Speaker also cautioned MPs against using the term “cover-up” in relation to the matter, warning that he would take drastic action against any member who repeated the allegation on the floor.
Heated Exchange on Intelligence Sharing
The sitting also featured a sharp exchange on Ghana’s international intelligence cooperation. Minority Leader Afenyo-Markin raised concerns about the willingness of foreign counterparts to share intelligence on narcotics trafficking, referring to comments previously made by Interior Minister Mohammed Mubarak Muntaka. He said foreign partners were reportedly becoming hesitant about providing information because they suspected insiders could be involved in narcotics-related activities.
Muntaka, who was present in the Chamber, rejected what he described as attempts to misrepresent his remarks, explaining that his comments referred specifically to security and law-enforcement officials who could compromise investigations, rather than government Ministers or politically exposed persons. “In our case, we are treating crime as crime. And we do not care whoever is involved,” he said, stressing that anyone found to have participated in criminal activity would be dealt with.
Adjournment and What Comes Next
Following the ruling, the Minority Leader rose to comment, but Bagbin did not allow him to respond to the ruling. “Minority leader, I am aware of similar situations in the past in these matters. If that is where you want to take us back, I am sorry I can’t give you the position. I am sorry I will not give you the opportunity. You cannot react on what I have ruled,” the Speaker said.
Bagbin then directed that the House be adjourned until further notice. The indefinite adjournment leaves the timeline for Parliament’s next sitting uncertain, with the Minority’s promised constitutional challenge likely to shape the next phase of the confrontation over parliamentary oversight and the limits of sub judice in Ghana’s evolving narcotics crisis.
