Posted on: www.dailyguideghana.com
By William Yaw Owusu
Wednesday, November 09, 2016
Former Attorney General (AG) and Minister for Justice, Martin A.B.K.
Amidu, has observed that the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission, Charlotte
Osei, is still determined to rig the elections by disqualifying all 13 aspiring
candidates again.
The EC disqualified 13 presidential aspirants recently, sparking a flurry
of suits, but the Supreme Court normalized the situation when it ordered the
commission to allow the affected parties to correct the anomalies on their
nomination forms so that they could be allowed to contest in the December 7
election.
The EC had filed an application against the decision of an Accra high
court that ordered the re-instatement of Dr. Papa Kwesi Nduom, flag bearer of
the Progressive People’s Party (PPP), to enable him take part in the contest.
However, Mr. Amidu aka Citizen Vigilante, has said in a statement
that Mrs. Charlotte Osei’s posture showed clearly that she is not ready to
admit the disqualified aspirants and it was a sign that she wants to ‘rig’ the
election.
He said, “I fear the commissioner is determined to render nugatory
the decision and orders of the Supreme Court on technical grounds.”
The former AG posited, “The
determination of the Electoral Commissioner as the Returning Officer for the
Presidential Elections to still rig the elections by disqualifying all the 13
candidates in spite of the Supreme Court’s ruling of yesterday, 7th November,
2016, must be obvious to all reasonable people in the new grounds of discovered
defects in their nomination forms the commissioner submitted to each of the
candidates after the Court’s decision and orders were made.”
According to the former AG, media reports indicating that the
defects on Dr. Nduom’s nomination forms moving from 1 to 105 could be a grand
scheme to push the candidates out because the court adjudicated on only 1
anomaly and the EC itself “conveyed to Nduom in writing by the Commissioner
dated 10th October, 2016 which was an exhibit in the case.”
He pointed out, “The change in the number of defects allegedly now
detected by the Commissioner after her letters of 10th October, 2016 to each of
the candidates shows that she is using the Supreme Court ruling to change the
goal post in her determination to disqualify all the 13 candidates and permit
the rigging of the 2016 Presidential Election.”
New Nomination
Period
“I take the view that she is again taking advantage of the Supreme
Court ruling to wager on the fact that she is entitled by the Court ruling
within the new nomination period to put forth alleged new and profound errors
that will make it impossible for even Nduom and those others who have judgments
in their favour, to alter or amend the specific errors for which they obtained
their respective judgments in the High Court.”
Mr. Amidu said he was of the view that the EC boss “cannot do that,
based upon the Supreme Court ruling, even though the Court quashed the order of
the High Court directing the Commissioner to allow Papa Kwesi Nduom permission
to make alterations and amendments necessary to correct the double subscription
to his nomination paper.”
He said, “This is because Nduom’s action in the High Court was for a
hearing specifically to correct the double subscription to his nomination papers
and not new ones. That is the hearing the Supreme Court ordered for Nduom and
all the other candidates who received letters pinpointing their errors on or
around 10th October, 2016.
“The Commissioner appears to be relying upon a tricky part of the
Supreme Court ruling in which, after quashing the order of the High Court
permitting Nduom to make alterations and amendments necessary to correct the
double subscription to his nomination paper, the Court also ordered that ‘in
appropriate cases to afford candidates the opportunity to comply with
regulation ((2) of the Public Election Regulations 2016 (C.I. 94)’.”
He said he did not think “the Court intended to go beyond the
subsisting judgments in favour of some of the applicants and those without
judgments to allow the Commissioner to change the goal posts anew.”
No comments:
Post a Comment