body-container-line-1
18.07.2013 Feature Article

Ghana Supreme Court Expected To Be Bold in Pronouncing Judgment: Kobby Annan

Kobby AnnanKobby Annan
18.07.2013 LISTEN

If the Ghana's Supreme Court thinks that the evidence and facts before it has exposed irregularities and malpractices, and in their opinion the loser was made winner and the winner made loser, it would boldly say so emphatically. It would not insulate itself with a re-run verdict.

In the ongoing proceedings at the Supreme Court of Ghana it is the three petitioner's case in challenging the results of the 2012 presidential election. The three petitioners, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, Dr. Bawumia and Jake Obetsebi Lamptey alleges constitutional and statutory violations, irregularities, malpractices and in furtherance have put their evidence before the court in correlation with facts to prove their case. In proof of their petition, these petitioners pray that the Supreme Court (1) declares that John Dramani Mahama was not validly elected as president of the Republic of Ghana. (2) declares that Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo rather is the validly elected President of the Republic of Ghana. (3) Make consequential orders that the court may seem meet. Certainly these are the reliefs sought in court.

As the case proceeds into its 50th -60th day and eight month and approaching its determination, many Ghanaians and stake holders are already as expected, speculating on the outcome. Notwithstanding the petitioner's relief No.3 praying the Supreme Court to make any consequential orders that it may 'deem fit,' the petitioners at no point in their three-point relief prayed the court to order a possible re-run of the 2012 presidential election. At this stage, of the proceedings, it is rather vital for litigating parties and their followers to seriously focus on post-judgment strategies to consolidate our democracy.

Conversely some individuals or groups are already either mischievously or nervously propelling an agenda on peoples mind. These individuals and groups are quietly propelling a kind phobia which seeks to imply that, in an event John Dramani Mahama is adjudged to have lost the election and Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo had won the election or the status quo maintained, the Peace and Security of the country can be disturbed. For this reason, they claim our Justices will certainly rule for an election re-run, to maintain peace and security in Ghana. Obviously, where there is Justice there is always Peace. So to the extent that our Justices of the Supreme Court are mandated by our constitution to deliver justice to the people of Ghana, but not to deliver and maintain peace, I boldly detach myself from these fears and humbly differ from such line of thoughts. I insist on others to also shun such fears, although an order for a re-run may is a possibility on the basis of the petitioner's evidence.

The Court will not be intimidated by the political shenanigans of possible unrest or insecurity. It is preposterous to prepare people's mind that a re-run of the election is the best and only ruling acceptable by Ghanaians. After all, both Mr. John Dramani Mahama and Nana Akufo Addo have expressed they will respect any ruling of the court. In any case those who strongly believe the Justices are custodians of our nation's peace, and therefore anticipate an election re-run to be the only Judgment option available to the Justices in maintaining national peace, should also wish the justices consider the 'financial double Jeopardy' the Ghanaian tax payer will suffer in the case of a re-run. A quick reference to the cash given to the EC coupled with other financial improprieties by incumbent during elections will make meaning of the state suffering double expenditure for the same national event.

Arguably, it is evident that in view of the nation's demand for ensuring that the Electoral Commission of Ghana is adequately resourced to conduct free, fair and transparent elections, the EC was allocated an amount of GH¢ 262.5m from the Consolidated Fund. This Tax payer's money was meant for biometric registration, acquisition of Biometric verification device, conduct and supervision of the 2012 Presidential and Parliamentary elections, to the satisfaction of all stakeholders in order to consolidate Ghana's democratic process. The EC woefully failed to achieve the objective of disbursing this GH¢ 262.5m. Though the petitioners are not in court to seek electoral reforms, Ghana's electoral system will undeniably undergo a major reform irrespective of the Supreme Court's ruling.

Let's consider the culture of misuse of state resources by incumbents in Ghana's electoral campaigns. Miraculously, the state losses undisclosed huge sums of money at the expense of the tax payer during election campaigns. Who says the incumbent cannot easily siphon more than GH¢108.5m (GH¢371- GH¢262.5) from the national coffers to help run their campaign for a re-run? So Ghana will suffer 'double double' in case of a re-run.

The proponent of an election re-run should also support the Justices consideration of the recent introduction of a National Stabilisation Levy, by the John Mahama's NDC government in anticipation to raise GH¢371million, through customs and excise and special import taxes. Having already spent GH¢262.5m on 2012 elections, an unlikely election re-run will certainly make nonsense of these new taxes in the name of national stabilisation levy, which seeks to rake in GH¢371m. For whatever purposes government needs this amount of money, the ordinary Ghanaian and Government will not benefit in case of a re-run. A re-run can worsen current fiscal situation of the country and the suffering of our masses can still lead to unrest and insecurity.

Finally, without going into the merits of the case, it is very important to understand why the peace and security or the financial state of Ghana's economy would not inform the judgment of our Justices to order a re-run of 2012 presidential election. Respectfully, I submit that our Supreme Court Justices are not custodians of our state security or Treasury. They are statutorily mandated to deliver justice, based purely on the weight of evidence and fact adduced before them. So far in these proceedings, nobody will disagree that some statutory violations, irregularities and malpractices did affect the 2012 presidential election. Whether these statutory violations, irregularities and malpractices were enough to overturn the initial declaration of John Mahama as validly elected is yet to be pronounced by the Supreme Court. If they were, the Justices will say so emphatically and boldly. Ghana will then be the winner.

Kobby Annan
Amsterdam NL.
[email protected]

body-container-line