Ghana’s Supreme Court building
The Supreme Court has fixed Friday, October 19 to give its judgment in the case by a businessman, Ransford France, challenging the legality of CI 78, a new law which created the new 45 constituencies.
The plaintiff filed a suit at the court presided over by Justice William Atuguba challenging the authority of the Electoral Commission (EC) to create the 45 new constituencies.
Mr. France, the plaintiff, is challenging the power of the EC to go ahead with the creation of constituencies without first laying before Parliament a constitutional instrument indicating clearly the mechanism, formula or modalities by which it intended to undertake that exercise.
At the court yesterday, the Supreme Court justices subjected lawyers for the plaintiff and the defendants, EC and the Attorney-General (AG’s) representative to thorough grilling over their stance on the motion before the court.
Godfried Yeboah Dame, who moved the motion, argued that the EC violated article 296 (c) of the constitution by not following the procedure set out there.
Article 296 states that “where the person or the authority is not a judge or other judicial officer, there shall be published by the constitutional instrument or statutory instrument, regulations that are not inconsistent with the provisions of this constitution or that other law to govern the exercise of the discretionary power”.
According to Mr Yeboah-Dame, who argued that there was a need for transparency and accountability in the electoral process, the EC did not give any reason why the mode and manner could not be published.
Mr. France is seeking six reliefs including a perpetual injunction restraining the EC from laying before Parliament any Constitutional Instrument creating additional constituencies and/or revoking the Representation of the People (Parliamentary Constituencies) Instrument, 2004 [C.I. 46], until it lays before Parliament a Constitutional Instrument which clearly sets out the processes to be adopted by the EC.
James Quarshie Idun, the lawyer for EC, argued that the EC had not committed any illegality because it followed the rules for creating new constituencies as clearly set up in Article 47 of the constitution.
According to him, the EC had the discretionary power to create the 45 constituencies under the constitution and that if the plaintiff was aggrieved, he could seek redress under Article 48 which states that “a person aggrieved by a decision of the EC in respect of a demarcation of a boundary may appeal to a tribunal consisting of three persons appointed by the Chief Justice and the EC shall give effect of the decision of the tribunal”.
Cecil Adadevor, a representative of the EC, was also of the view that the EC did not flout any law under the constitution in the creation of the new constituencies.
He however did not argue his stand much and only said he was relying on the documents he had filed in court.
The rest of the panel members are Justices Date-Baah, Sophia Adinyira, Rose Owusu, Annin-Yeboah, Sule Gbadegbe and Vida Akoto-Bamfo.
Cited in the suit are the EC and the Attorney General.
Posts
