AYV News, August 11, 2026
Two Members of Parliament representing the All People’s Congress (APC), Hon. Mohamed Bangura and Hon. Alfred Thompson, have become the subject of renewed public debate after remaining in Parliament while their fellow APC MPs walked out of the Chamber during the ongoing constitutional amendment proceedings.
The two lawmakers’ decision has generated significant discussion on social media, with some members of the public questioning why they did not join the APC Parliamentary Caucus in withdrawing from the proceedings.
Their decision comes against the backdrop of their existing suspension from the APC. Both lawmakers are currently serving party suspensions after refusing to comply with the party’s earlier directive for its elected Members of Parliament to boycott governance following the June 24 general elections, which the APC disputed.
At the time, Hon. Mohamed Bangura and Hon. Alfred Thompson were among APC MPs who chose to remain in Parliament and continue representing their constituencies despite the party’s position.
Their decision to participate in parliamentary proceedings subsequently became a subject of political debate, with some APC supporters accusing the lawmakers of failing to follow the party line, while others argued that elected MPs have a responsibility to remain in Parliament and represent the interests of their constituents.
That debate has resurfaced following the latest walkout by APC MPs over the Speaker’s ruling on the constitutional voting threshold.
While the majority of APC lawmakers exited the Chamber, Bangura and Thompson remained behind and continued participating in the proceedings.
Their decision has again triggered reactions from sections of the public, with some describing their actions as a second instance of defying the position of their political party.
However, the two lawmakers have consistently maintained that their primary responsibility is to the people who elected them.
They have argued that their presence in Parliament is necessary to ensure that the voices and interests of their constituents are represented, regardless of disagreements between the party and the parliamentary authorities.
The latest development has once again highlighted the delicate balance between party discipline and the constitutional responsibilities of elected Members of Parliament.
While political parties are entitled to establish positions and directives for their members, MPs also have parliamentary responsibilities to their constituencies and to the institution in which they serve.
The actions of Bangura and Thompson therefore continue to fuel a wider national conversation about the extent to which elected lawmakers should follow party directives when those directives conflict with their understanding of their responsibilities to constituents.
As Parliament continues consideration of the Constitutional Amendment Bill, the two APC lawmakers’ decision to remain in the Chamber is likely to remain a subject of political and public discussion.
