The case against the Assin North MP is not that he is a dual citizen. He is not!

The case against him is that he did not compel the Canadian officials to process his renunciation application quickly enough such that even if the renunciation became effective before the elections and was accepted by the EC, he must be forced to vacate his post for a bye-election that he is fully eligible to compete in.

I cannot support this line of reasoning and I reject it.

The undisputed facts are that he filed for the renunciation of his Canadian citizenship in December 2019, a full year ahead of the 2020 general elections. The processing of the application was delayed by the pandemic but was granted in November 2020. It normally takes 3 months.

The EC inspected his certificate of renunciation pursuant to a letter of 24 November 2020 and cleared him to run for his seat on December 7, 2020.

He was elected on December 7, 2020 and duly sworn in as an MP on January 7, 2021.

What is the law that is being used to take his seat from him? It is Article 94(2)(a).

That law says that “a person shall not be qualified to be a member of Parliament if he owes allegiance to a country other than Ghana.”

Notice that this law does not talk about dual citizenship. However, that is a complex issue, for the current purpose, so let us assume it does.

The law does not say anything about when this disqualification applies. Is it at the time of filing for the party primary, the general election, voting day, or on the first day of Parliament?

A high court judge cannot rely on Wikipedia to insert a date into Article 94(2)(a), even if we allow him to equate allegiance to dual citizenship, a demonstrably flawed equation.

But even if he wants to take liberties with the Constitution, a petition that calls for setting aside election results MUST be guided by PNDCL 284(20)(d), which reminds us that voters’ wishes must be respected, therefore the ground for cancelling an election result is “that the candidate was at the time of his election a person not qualified or a person disqualified for election.”

So the only question the high court judge should ask is that on December 7, 2020, at the time of his election, had he applied to renounce (the subjective test) or if you want to use an objective test had his renunciation become effective?

How difficult is this to figure out? Did this same court system not answer an analogous question in the Dr. Zanetor case not too long ago?

How does this clear error become invisible to the appellate courts? How does the appellate system not see that a high court judge has impermissibly interpreted “allegiance” and inserted his own dates in article 94(2)(a), disregarded PNDCL 284 20(d), and has applied an objective standard to allegiance, which is a subjective concept?

Subjective here means allegiance is presumed to be owed by the MP so it is he who can discharge it by the act of applying to do so; and objective here is that it is only Canada that can set him free from his debt of allegiance. If Canada ignores his application then the poor MP still owes allegiance even if he surrounded his passport to the Canadians and relocated to his holy village in Assin North.

The EC reviewed the Assin North MPs papers, including his renunciation certificate, and applied the law to say he is qualified to be an MP and to be on the ballot.

Why is this call by the EC not subject to the usual deference that the Courts give to the EC in these matters?

Those who want to disqualify him, and apparently the courts too, have set aside section 20(d) of PNDCL 284 and inserted their own deadline in article 94(2)(a).

We must do better as a nation! There is just too much political savagery. And the courts must do much much much better!!

Is it now the law that the time that Canada (other countries) acts on renunciation applications decides who qualifies to be a Ghanafuo MP? Will Ghanafuo be permanently barred from running as MP if Canada passes a law that it no longer allows renunciation of Canadian citizenship?

If one believes that maize cannot get justice in the court of chickens, maybe it is time to examine the justice in barring dual citizens from sitting on the Supreme Court. Justice will be a fleeting illusion where any class of people is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to degrade them.

GOGO is saddened by the extent that we go to ruin bona fide Ghanafuo.

#SALL is the cardinal sin of the 8th Parliament.

Da Yie!