×

Error

AutoTweet NG Component is not installed or not enabled. - /home/danquahi/public_html/plugins/system/autotweetcontent/autotweetcontent.php

 

By the middle of July, the nation expects its sovereign Parliament to debate and vote on the constitutional amendment intended to change the date for holding general elections in Ghana from December 7 to November 7. Since, 1992, when the presidential election was held in November, all subsequent ones were held on December 7. The bill needs both Parliamentary Majority and Minority to agree in order to become law.

Whiles it is generally accepted that there are very sound reasons informing the push to hold, especially, the presidential poll, two months before the January 7 swearing-in date, the Danquah Institute (DI) is concerned about:

(1) the practical preparedness of the Electoral Commission (EC) to make the November 7 date happen, and

(2) the intention of the Commission to give Ghanaians a free, fair and credible elections, which must be the overriding issue.

Our concerns are mainly due to the blatant and curious posture of the Electoral Commission against obeying a clear and express order of the Supreme Court to take immediate and necessary steps to clean the register of:

(1) both dead people and the millions of names which got onto the electoral roll using NHIS cards to establish eligibility, and

(2) for the EC to give the eligible Ghanaians among them the opportunity to re-register and in time for the 2016 polls.

It is important to recognize that, going by the proposed November 7 date, we have just five months to vote and the law imposes a mandatory freeze on any modification of the active register for this year’s elections, 60 days (or two months) before voting. This means, the entire process of deletion and re-registration of millions of names must be completed before September 7 if the November 7 date should hold.

The Supreme Court held on May 5, 2016 that:

(a) “That the Electoral Commission takes steps immediately to delete or as is popularly known ‘clean” the current register of voters to comply with the provisions of the 1992 Constitution, and applicable laws of Ghana;

(b) “That any person whose name is deleted from the register of voters by the Electoral Commission pursuant to order (a) above be given the opportunity to register under the law."

 

Today is Thursday, June 2, 2016. Nearly one month since the Supreme Court gave its ruling on Thursday, the May 5. Rather than taking “immediate” steps, as ordered, to delete the names of those who registered using NHIS card, it took the EC two whole weeks to study the judgment and come out publicly to announce on Thursday, May 19 that the Court did not order it to delete the names of NHIS registrants.

A week later, on Thursday, May 26, a member of the Supreme Court panel, Justice Jones Dotse, in the presence of the Supreme Court judge who read the unanimous decision, Justice Sule Gbadegbe, was compelled by the strange behavior of the Electoral Commission to set the records straight.

In line with the Code of Conduct for Judges and Magistrates, which allows a judge to “explain for public information… what may be learned from the public record of the case,” Justice Dotse took pains to explain the May 5 decision:

“The Supreme Court was quite forthright and clear that the use of the NHIS cards is unconstitutional. The criteria for the NHIS cards were not based on Ghanaian citizenship but only on residents in Ghana. So, any foreigner who is resident in Ghana for six months and more can register under the NHIS card. That was the basis upon which we base our decision in 2014.

“And in the recent one, we said the use of the NHIS is, therefore, unconstitutional. [The EC] should take the opportunity to clean the register of those undesirable persons. We also did not want to disenfranchise anybody so the Supreme Court went on to say that anybody who will be affected by that exercise must be given the opportunity to register, according to the law and constitution.”

It is recalled that the Supreme Court declared in the first Abu Ramadan case in 2014 that “upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 42 of the Constitution, the use of the National Health Insurance Card as proof of qualification to register as a voter pursuant to the Public Elections (Registration of Voters) Regulations 2012 (C.I. 72) is unconstitutional, void, and of no effect.”

158 Days to Nov 7 Date

As it is now, the EC says it intends to hold the 2016 general elections on November 7. This means that we have 158 days to the polls. Already 26 days have gone by without the EC manifestly taking any steps to comply with the decision of the Court.

The truth is that, as much as it is showing such great reluctance to obey, the EC cannot escape from the Supreme Court decision. It has no choice but to comply. This brings up two key questions:

(1) What are the necessary legitimate steps that the EC should and must take in order to delete those millions of names and re-register those who are eligible to vote?

(2) Will the EC be able to comply with the order in full and still hold the general elections in November rather than December?

Background

Before we proceed to discuss the two issues above, a little background on the November 7 date should help. In its April 2015 report, the 10-member Electoral Reforms Committee set up by the EC­­­­ –– which included the EC, political parties and civil society groups –– recommended the change of polling date to November 7.

This was a proposal from the Institute for Economic Affairs (IEA), which had argued that “bringing the Election Day forward to November 7 will allow ample time for run-offs (which are expected to be conducted three weeks after the general election) and settlement of possible disputes after the election.”

Last month, leadership from both the Majority and Minority sides of Parliament raised concerns over the practicalities of holding this year’s elections on November 7.

According to a Daily Graphic report, “while the Minority says the posture of the EC, especially its Chairperson, Mrs Charlotte Osei, did not support consensus building, and for which reason, there could be problems in the processes towards changing the date, the Majority Leader, Mr Alban Bagbin, said time might not be on the side of the processes for an amendment,” the report read.

The 1992 Constitution and Constitutional Amendment

What then does the Constitution say? Article 291 (1) of the 1992 Constitution states that a bill to amend a provision of the Constitution which is not an entrenched provision shall not be introduced into Parliament unless:

“(a) It has been published twice in a Gazette, with the second publication being made at least three months after the first; and

“(b) at least ten days have passed after the second publication.”

Article 291 (2) reads:

“the Speaker shall, after the first reading of the bill in Parliament; refer it to the Council of State for consideration and advice and the Council of State shall render advice on the bill within 30 days after receiving it”.

Further on, Article 291 (3) and (4) say:

“Where Parliament approves the bill, it may only be presented to the President for his assent if it was approved at the second and third readings of it in Parliament by the votes of at least two thirds of all members of Parliament.

“Where the bill has been passed in accordance with this article, the President shall assent to it.”

On the issue of time for the amendment, it is quite clear that so long as the amendment can carry a two-thirds majority of the entire House, it can pass. This would require at least 30 Members from the Minority side joining forces with all MPs from the Minority side.

PARLIAMENT MUST STAND FIRM

This is where we will urge the Minority to stand firm on the side of a credible, free and fair elections when this matter comes up.

In as much as the country appears to be desirous of and impatient for change, the Minority should not allow the EC to impose a November 7, 2016 date on us if it cannot convince the country that it has taken the necessary, legitimate, logical, efficient and impartial steps to give Ghanaians a clean register as ordered by the apex court of the land.

So far, the Charlotte-Osei-led electoral management body of Ghana has shown nothing but odd contempt at all efforts to address the issue of Ghana’s bloated register.

(1) It ignored calls from political parties and civil society groups to have a new, credible register.

(2) It ignored proposals from its own Panel of Experts to undertake validation (or authentication or verification) of all existing voters to clean the register.

(3) It is currently trying to frustrate the strict, express order of the Supreme Court to clean the register.

Indeed, the only other main stakeholder in the electoral process that is vehemently opposed to removing the names of NHIS registrants from the register and allowing them to re-register is the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC). This, unfortunately, creates the unhelpful impression that the EC is working with the ruling NDC to rig the 2016 general elections.

The EC has, with apparent ill motive, wasted a whole month that could have been employed to start the process of cleaning the register. Yet, it is asking the people of Ghana, through their parliamentary representatives, to vote to amend the Constitution to hold the elections a month earlier.

What this could effectively mean is that once the constitutional amendment is passed and the EC gets its way, the Commission is likely to hide behind it to frustrate an efficient process of deletion and re-registration as ordered by the Court. This should not be allowed to happen.

With this terrible scenario of deliberate non-compliance in mind, the Danquah Institute recommends the following:

(1) The EC must within the shortest possible time, tell Ghanaians both the process and timetable it intends to follow in order to comply fully with the orders of the Supreme Court. This must be done and the process towards it started way before the constitutional amendment bill is laid before Parliament for first reading on June 20 or June 21.

(2) The EC must lay before the House for the mandatory 21 days a Constitutional Instrument (CI) to give clear legal backing to both the process of deletion and re-registration of NHIS card registrants as ordered by the Supreme Court.

(3) This must be done and the CI matured before the constitutional amendment bill comes to the House for its second reading, which is likely to take place in the first or second week of July.

It is at the second reading stage that Members are allowed to state their position on the bill. Parliament should use this opportunity to step up to the challenge to save our democracy by making sure that the order to grant Ghana a clean, credible register has been adhered to before committing the country to a November 7 date.

Apart from the EC’s own obstinate resistance to giving Ghanaians a clean register, there appears to be clear obstacles that may seem insurmountable in complying with the Court order. But, we know if the Charlotte-Osei-led Commission is sincere, honest and committed to doing the right thing those obstacles can be so easily overcome and Ghanaians will go into the next election, whether on November 7 or December 7, with a clean and credible register.

The Danquah Institute will hold another news conference soon to share with the general public the options available to the EC, which the Commission itself is fully aware of but curiously reluctant to implement.

In the meantime we hope that the Commission will deem it necessary to respond and positively so to the issues we have raised and the recommendations we have proposed.

We thank you for your attention and partnership.

Other Stories

Report on the Presidential Election Petition in Ghana
The international community, generally, endorsed Ghana’s 2012 elections as “free and fair.” Ghana, the continent’s star of democracy, had done it once again for Africa. John Mahama, the declared winner, was duly sworn in without any violent protests on January 7, 2013. But, the country’s biggest opposition party filed a petition in Ghana’s supreme court, (the first of its kind in the country’s history), challenging the presidential results. Click here for full report
Supreme Court Will Not Tolerate Cross-Examination Method Of Tony Lithur
The President of the presidential election petition panel, William Atuguba JSC, has directed that the court will no longer accept the cross examination method of Tony Lithur, lawyer for John Mahama, stating emphatically that Mr Lithur should list all the pinksheets he has issues with and say their effect on the numbers and this must be done "forthwith" before Monday. A letter dated 19th April 2013, titled “The mode of continuation of cross-examination of 2nd Petitioner on pink sheets” and signed by Justice William Atuguba, himself, was sent to all parties by in the Supreme Court case, where the petitioners are challenging the outcome of the 2012 elections.
(PANA)-- African foreign ministers meeting on Thursday, January 27,eugene came under pressure from foreign partners on the need to correct the continent’s electoral flaws that have precipitated the kind of post-election crisis in Cote d’Ivoire. Denmark’s Foreign Minister Lene Espersen told the opening session of the AU’s Executive Council meeting that despite overall progress in the field of democratisation, the challenge of organising free and fair elections and lack of proper state institutions constituted a worrying trend in Africa.‘It is unfortunate that recently, we have seen a number of challenges to electoral processes and institutions, latest in Cote d’Ivoire,’ she said.
12 Questions from DI to IMF
Mr John Lipsky, First Deputy Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), would visit Ghana on February 16-17 as part of a two-nation West African tour that begins in Monrovia, Liberia, on February 14-16. A press release issued by the IMF External Relations Department, said he would hold discussions with policy makers and key opinion leaders on the countries' economic prospects.
Technology is the solution to Illiteracy – Mr. Kofi Bentil
Mr. Kofi Bentil of IMANI Ghana has stated that the solution to illiteracy in Ghana is the introduction of technology into all spheres of the Ghanaian life.He made this statement at a conference being organised by the Danquah Institute on biometric voter registration and electronic voting in Ghana. The first day of the two days conference was devoted to interrogating the advantages and challenges of introducing biometric voter registration and the second day devoted to e-voting in Ghana.
Danquah Institute To Chief Justice:  Televise NPP'S Historic Legal Case
Gabby Asare Otchere-Darko, the Executive Director of research, policy and governance think tank, Danquah Institute, today appealed to Chief Justice, Georgina Theodora Wood, who presides on all cases before the Supreme Court, to allow television cameras to broadcast all proceedings of the upcoming law suit by the New Patriotic Party, which intends to prove that a manipulation of the actual election results by the Electoral Commission resulted in a faulty declaration of John Drahmani Mahama as the winner of the 2012 presidential election. He said, a live televised broadcast of such a historical case for our democracy, with its far-reaching implications for this and future elections, would reduce opportunities for some people to put a self-serving spin on the proceedings and decision of the court, with the intention of inciting undue negative reactions from an already divided nation.
$16bn Worth Of Made In China Smoke & Mirrors - Na Sika No Wo He?
The news across newswires globally was “China to Pump $16bn into Ghana”. Reuters, Ghanaweb, Bloomberg, Wall Street Journal, FT, and newspapers across Africa carried the news as if the money was their country-bound. What was common about all the worldwide news was that the original source quoted was the Government of Ghana website. The Mills-Mahama administration certainly saw this as a timely massive dosage of do-much perception purely for domestic consumption, one may speculate.
Postponement of Liberty Lecture
The Danquah Institute regrets to announce that the Liberty Lecture scheduled for this evening has been postponed to Wednesday, August 31, 2011. We regret deeply any inconvenience caused by this postponement.
Calling Danquah a spy is insulting to the memory of Ghanaian Nationalists
In his book, “By Nkrumah’s Side”, Tawiah Adamafio, a former confidante of Dr Kwame Nkrumah and Information Minister of the Convention People’s Party administration, who was later on to be tried and convicted for the Kulungugu assassination attempt on the life of Ghana’s first President, wrote of the nature of the CPP at the time: “I knew their intrigues and jealousies, the vicious whispering campaigns and the rumour mongering, the deliberate name-smearing and wicked mud-slinging, the character assassination, the interminable inner party struggle, the incompetence and greed, the bribery and corruption.” more>>>
Press Release: Gov’t loses another landmark court case; reduce fuel prices, court orders
An Accra High Court (Cocoa Affairs, Court 11) presided over by His Lordship Patrick Baayeh has handed down a heavy judgement on the National Petroleum Authority (NPA) and Tema Oil Refinery (TOR) in a case in which three plaintiffs accused the NPAand TOR of inflating fuel prices and using the money for hidden purposes. more>>