Bagbin rejects Minority’s motion for parliamentary probe into narcotics consignments

Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin has rejected a Minority motion seeking a bipartisan parliamentary inquiry into major narcotics consignments linked to Ghana, citing concerns that the proposed investigation could interfere with ongoing court proceedings.

The motion, filed on September 28 by First Deputy Minority Whip and Tolon MP Habib Iddrisu, called for the establishment of an Ad Hoc Committee to investigate how major narcotics consignments were processed, inspected, cleared and exported from Ghana.

The Minority cited the seizure of 3.9 metric tonnes of cocaine by French Customs at Dunkirk on September 10, 2026, and the seizure of 320 kilogrammes of methamphetamine by the Australian Border Force in June 2026. It also referenced earlier cocaine interceptions in Takoradi and Pedu in Cape Coast.

Ruling on the motion at Parliament’s emergency sitting on Tuesday, September 29, Mr Bagbin said the proposed inquiry had significant factual overlap with matters currently before the courts.

He explained that the investigation could require Parliament to examine evidence, witnesses, conduct and questions of responsibility that are relevant to pending judicial proceedings.

“The proposed parliamentary enquiry will traverse factual matters directly connected with matters presently engaging the criminal justice process,” Mr Bagbin said.

According to the Speaker, allowing the proposed committee to proceed would require Parliament to investigate how the narcotics consignments were handled and assess the actions or inactions of various actors at ports of entry.

He said such an exercise could lead Parliament into determining issues that properly fall within the jurisdiction of the courts.

“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.

Mr Bagbin further warned that proceeding with the inquiry in its current form could prejudice the interests of parties involved in the pending cases.

“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 said.

He subsequently ruled the private members’ motion inadmissible under Parliament’s Standing Orders.

“I therefore rule, pursuant to Standing Orders 5, 6, and 103, Sub-Rule F, that the private member’s motion is inadmissible,” Mr Bagbin said.