23/10/2024
For any of us reading today who thinks that he has a better understanding of the ambiguity arising from article 79 thereof than the framers of our constitution is a joke. Now, imagine a scenario where an NDC MP after being sponsored and riding on the ideology of that party that sunk with the constituents vis-à-vis a vote for him, sworn into office on the 7th of January only to cross carpet on the 8th of January to the NPP o aide them make up a majority in the case of a hang parliament as prevail currently.
Note also that people vote for MPs not because of affiliation or fondness but by sheer reason of the colors they fly.
Cross carpeting is mischievous in politics , it is not to happen at all hence the framers made it unprofitable, it’s even lenient in the sense that it allows you to continue your work in parliament, it should be that once you fall off your party, you fall of parliament, you loose being honorable.
There’s so much to loose for the carpet you’re crossing from, you’re crossing with loads of strategic info perhaps used by the party to win elections, you may even be crossing without the consent of your constituents, some of whom may have donated towards your campaign.
It’s also true that an MP may not be in support of a party position at any given time. In such an instance the framers were wise enough to allow argue your case on the floor of parliament to articulate your position or better still in the case of voting you may choose to abstain or vote against.
Ideology and principles of a political party are not something you can change overnight.
When you disagree, you abstain, you don’t cross carpet or better still resign.
