NPP race: My Lords, this GHS4 million fee is not party development; it is candidate elimination — Kwaku Azar tells court
Legal scholar and governance advocate Prof. Stephen Kwaku Asare, widely known as Kwaku Azar, has filed a landmark case challenging the New Patriotic Party’s (NPP) decision to levy a GHS 4 million “development fee” on aspirants seeking to contest the party’s presidential primary scheduled for January 31, 2026.
In a statement submitted to the courts, Prof. Azar argued that the fee undermines internal party democracy, violating principles of fairness, inclusion, and non-discrimination enshrined in Ghana’s 1992 Constitution.
He emphasized that the suit is not a challenge to reasonable nomination or filing fees, but targets the legality and constitutionality of an additional “development fee” unrelated to the administrative cost of running the election.
Court documents reveal that the NPP requires aspirants to pay GHS 100,000 for nomination forms, GHS 500,000 for filing, and an extra GHS 4 million as a so-called development levy.
Prof. Azar described this additional charge as “a wealth-based barrier” designed to exclude capable candidates who lack substantial financial resources, effectively concentrating political opportunities among the affluent.
“My Lords, this GHS 4 million fee is not party development; it is candidate elimination,” Prof. Azar stated in his filing. “It is an economic filter meant to predetermine leadership pools, in violation of Article 55(5) and Article 296 of our Constitution.”
The case raises critical constitutional questions, including whether the fee contravenes Article 55(5), which requires political parties to operate democratically, and whether it breaches Article 296, which mandates that discretionary powers be exercised reasonably and in good faith.
Prof. Azar also pointed to Article 55(2), which guarantees every citizen the right to participate in political party activities without discrimination, arguing that financial barriers deny this fundamental right.
Citing Article 12 of the NPP Constitution, which only authorizes a “prescribed fee” for presidential aspirants, Prof. Azar maintained that the party’s National Executive Committee (NEC) exceeded its authority by imposing the additional fee.
He stressed that the charge is disproportionate, unrelated to the cost of organising the primary, and therefore unconstitutional.
Among the remedies sought, Prof. Azar is requesting a declaration that the GHS 4 million fee is null and void, an injunction preventing the NPP from enforcing it, and a court order compelling the party to conduct its internal elections in line with constitutional principles.
He has also called for protection against harassment, urging the court to prevent party members from threatening or assaulting him for challenging the fee.
Observers note that the case could have far-reaching implications for how political parties in Ghana structure their internal elections and fund their activities. A favorable ruling could set a precedent against using exorbitant financial requirements as a barrier to political participation, a practice long criticized by governance reform advocates.