Tag Archives: Supreme Court

“When Will The Supreme Court Wake Up?” – Prof Frimpong


A Professor of Law and Dean of Research and Graduate studies at the Mountcrest University College has stated that the Supreme Court, in their judgment handed down in the Presidential Election Petition, disappointed Ghanaians and failed to uphold the 1992 constitution of the Republic of Ghana.

Professor Kwame Frimpong, at a symposium organised by the Danquah Institute to critique the judgment of the 9 judges, stated that the judges failed woefully to discharge their constitutionally mandated duty.

He explained that the petition filed by the petitioners was a perfect opportunity for Supreme Court to “take a firm position against impunity that has been ravaging this nation” but rather chose to endorse an illegality. Continue reading

Advertisements

“Judgment went 5-4 in favour of the Petitioners” – Sam Okudzeto


A former President of the Ghana Bar Association and renowned lawyer, Samuel Okudzeto, has stated that his analysis of the 588 paged judgment, handed down by the Supreme Court on the presidential election petition, reveals that the judgment went 5-4 in favour of the petitioners.

At a symposium organized by the Danquah Institute to review the Supreme Court’s decision in the election petition filed by Nana Akufo-Addo, Sam Okudzeto stated that the judgment handed down by Justice Atuguba did not establish the fact that the petitioners lost the case.

He was therefore at a loss as to how the Atuguba Court came about the decision that the petitioners lost the case. Continue reading

Thou Shall Not Speak Evil Of Another NPP Person – Dr. Bawumia


The running mate to Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) in the 2012 elections, Dr Mahamudu Bawumia, has appealed to members of the party not to speak evil of one another since it leads to self destruction.

He pointed out that in as much as “we may have our differences there is no need to go public since a lot is expected from us as a formidable political party”.

He said the NPP had a strong message for Ghanaians and before this could be translated into governance, the party must be seen to be united and ready to take over the reins of power from the National Democratic Congress (NDC) government led by President John Mahama. Continue reading

Reviewing the Supreme Court’s judgment in Akufo-Addo v. John Mahama


DI HOLDS SYMPOSIUM ON PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION PETITION

The Danquah Institute, in partnership with other civil society groups, will on Wednesday, September 25, 2013, hold a symposium for jurists and other legal and statistics experts to critique the judgement of the Supreme Court in the presidential election petition filed by Nana Akufo-Addo and two others against the election of President John Mahama in the December 2012 election.

The Symposium which is on the theme: “Reviewing the Supreme Court’s judgemnt in Akufo-Addo vs John Mahama” will take place at the National Theatre at 4pm.

Speakers at the event will include:

·    Sam Okudzeto:- Renowned Lawyer and a former President of the Ghana Bar Association

·    Prof. Kwame Frimpong:- Founding Dean and Professor of Law of GIMPA Law School, and currently the Dean at the School of Research and Graduate Studies at the MountCrest University College.

·         Dr Maurice Ampaw:- A Lawyer and the President of the Legal Advisory Foundation

·         Kissi Agyabeng:- Senior Law lecturer of the Ghana Law School

·         Kofi Bentil:- A Lawyer and the Vice-President & Strategy Manager at IMANI Ghana.

The event will be streamed live on the website of the Danquah Institute and will also be aired live on radio. The General Public is cordially invited to this event.

MULTIPLE & UNACCOUNTED REGISTRATIONS IN VOTERS’ REGISTER & 307,000 UNACCOUNTED BALLOT PAPERS PROVIDED OPPORTUNITY FOR IRREGULARITIES – PETITIONERS


Multiple and unaccounted identities in the voters’ register as well as the over 300,000 ballot papers the Electoral Commission could not account for in the course of the ongoing Presidential Election petition, according to the petitioners, provided an opportunity for the various infractions which characterized the 2012 General Elections to occur.

According to the 176 paged address of the petitioners, the EC’s failure to account fully for the 241,524 persons it claims increased the voters’ register from 13,917,366 to 14,158,890 and the several multiple registrations found in the voters’ register served as a conduit to facilitate infractions like over-voting and voting without biometric verification.

Unaccounted Registrations in Voters’ Register 

The petitioners drew the court’s attention to the Electoral Commission’s answers to the petition and subsequent answers to queries on the voters’ register which the EC was unable to substantiate and which clearly proved the huge imperfections with the voters register.

“In its Answer to the Petition, the 2nd respondent provided an initial provisional registration figure of 13,917,366. The 2nd respondent further claimed that after the conduct of registration of Foreign Service officials, students abroad on Government of Ghana scholarship, Ghanaians working abroad in international organizations, and the late registration of foreign personnel returning from international peace-keeping duties, the figure increased to 14,158,890 registered voters. This represented an increase of 241,524 registered voters over the provisional registration figure of 13,917,366. Continue reading

Petition to the Chief Justice of Ghana


Petition to the Chief Justice of Ghana to immediately halt the parading of people before the panel hearing the presidential petition on grounds that the exercise violates the Constitution and Public Policy

  1. On June 26, 2013, Justice Atuguba, the presiding judge of the 9-member panel used the Court as a vehicle to accuse Samuel Awuku of engaging in an ill- defined, improper conduct. The said conduct appears to be related to comments that Mr. Awuku made on air, during a political discussion. In particular, he is said to have criticized the panel for “being selective and hypocritical,” in citing a Daily Guide reportage of the Court’s proceedings.
  2. Mr. Awuku subsequently appeared before the panel and after a short hearing, in which he apologized for his comments, the panel banned him from making further appearances in the Court. As far as I could tell, Mr. Awuku was not represented by counsel. Nor was he accused of a specific offence (as far as I could tell).
  3. Presumably, Mr. Awuku’s out-of-court statements were contemptuous of the Court’s proceedings. If so, proper proceedings are required to establish his guilt.
  4. But it appeared he had been prejudged guilty and was summoned to appear before the Court to be sentenced.
  5. To date, the specific offence committed by Samuel Awuku remains unknown, although he has been sentenced. It is not enough for the Court to state in some general terms that some remarks are contemptuous. The Court must state in very specific terms how Mr. Awuku’s remarks are contemptuous, including at a minimum, setting boundaries for acceptable remarks, in light of the constitutional value of free speech.
  6. It is also not clear to me that a ban from appearing in the Court is one that is admitted by the sentencing guidelines where the crime is an out-of-court statement. It is important for laws to be properly applied on a rational, predictable basis. And this applies to accusations, trials, and sentencing. Continue reading
%d bloggers like this: