Lingering questions on the alternative reality of NPP’s presidential election petition

In every free and democratic country like Ghana that is governed by laws and ethics, all persons have inherent rights and corresponding obligations, duties or responsibilities.

The obligation to declare the winner of both parliamentary and presidential elections in Ghana is particularly the preserve of the Electoral Commission (EC) of Ghana. In this light and in the full participation of all political actors, the EC rightly declared 275 parliamentary candidates as winners and John Dramani Mahama as winner of the Presidential elections out of eight presidential candidates in the December 2012 general elections. The international community, led by the African Union (AU)/Ecowas election observers, heralded the elections as free, transparent and fair. The verdicts of domestic election observers including TV and radio stations were not any different. However, upon EC’s declaration of a presidential winner and whatever endorsements that might come along, it is still the inalienable right of any candidate who feels dissatisfied to protest by utilising the remedies available with the EC or petitioning the Supreme Court (SC) of Ghana in respect of the perceived circumvention of any rights (Art 64.1 of 1992 Constitution; Constitutional Instrument (CI) 74).

Much  worth  their right, it was therefore fascinating that by the 28^th  of December 2012  and well within the 21 days allowed  by (CI 74) 68A(1) ,  Nana Dankwa Akuffo-Addo (NPP presidential candidate),  Dr Mahamudu Bawumia (NPP Presidential running mate) and  Mr Jake Otanka Obestebi-Lamptey (NPP National Chairman) jointly petitioned the SC  claiming some irregularities, statutory violations and malpractices they perceived to have occurred which in their estimation ultimately disadvantaged the New Patriotic Party (NPP’s) presidential candidate from winning and that the declaration by the EC on 9^th December 2012 that  the National Democratic Congress (NDC’s) presidential candidate,  President John Dramani Mahama,  won the December 2012 presidential elections  with 50.70% representing 5,574,761  votes over Nana Akuffo-Addo’s  47.74% representing 5,248,896 votes  was flawed and should be overturned (EC,2012; SC Registry, 2012).

Key issues raised in the pending petition have been ‘over-voting, pink sheets without  signatures of presiding officers, polling stations with similar serial numbers, extra polling stations not part of the 26,002, mismatch of words and figures, wrong arithmetic and voting without biometric verification’. According to the Petitioners in the amended petition (7^th February 2013), these apparent irregularities, malpractices and statutory violations occurred in 11,916 polling stations (a jump from 4,709 in the original petition) thus affecting 4,670,504 valid votes (a jump from 1,342,845 in original petition) which they are praying the SC to annul, pronounce Nana Akuffo-Addo as the validly elected president and give any consequential orders deemed by the Court (SC Registry, 2013).   

Those are, indeed, very intriguing but curious allegations and demands from the Petitioners because of four main reasons: (1) At all material times, the representatives of NPP and the Petitioners were adequately represented equitably as that of the representatives of the NDC, President John Mahama and the EC (the three respondents to the petition). This included  voting, counting of votes, collation of votes, confirmation of votes and declaration of winner; (2) The processes thereof were adequately transparent and largely done in the full glare of the public as required by most of the safeguards in Article 49 of the Constitution and  CI 75 (articles 29 to 41 particularly); (3)  The irregularities, malpractices and statutory violations must have affected  all presidential candidates as well as all parliamentary candidates in such alleged polling stations; (4) SC has no mandate and capacity to declare any elections in Ghana, EC rather does (Art 63.9, 1992 Constitution). SC can only determine legality or validity of EC’s conduct or outcome thereof upon which SC can order EC to re-collate votes or re-conduct elections or put its house in order so as to redress the balance (Art 64.2, 1992 Constitution).

Even though the foregoing rights and obligations appear to be interspersed, it is clear that: (1) EC performed its duties; (2) President Mahama had been duly elected as president of Ghana (CI 80; 7^th January 2013 Parliamentary Hansard); (3) The Petitioners have also performed their duty by submitting their claims of case to the SC; (4) SC will hear the claimants’ case and shall come out with its verdict in due course. All of these must be respected by all well-meaning citizens and inhabitants of Ghana (1992 Constitution; (CI) 16, (CI) 74, (CI) 75).

Nonetheless, it appears that there is a deliberate ploy by the Petitioners and their supporters to sensationally exploit pettiness, rights and the law. These should likely amount to blatant abuse of democratic and judicial credentials of the country. Otherwise, how else do you expect the Petitioners to be alleging irregularities and malpractices in Court but from outside the Court their supporters are brandishing fraud and stealing?  

Why would Petitioners’ or NPP’s Members of Parliament (MPs) refuse to participate in anything involving President Mahama in so far as, according to them, such activities will not outlive the President in the event that the President is declared as invalid by the SC, yet such NPP’s MPs happily go home with GHC 50,000 accommodation allowance and other emoluments approved by the President? How come the NPP’s MPs do recognise their own validity to be MPs, yet the Nana Addo they and the Petitioners are vouching for with their superfluous allegations, who  equally went through same processes, venues, EC and time period but eventually lost to President Mahama is not recognised by them?

 At what point did the alleged malpractices or “stealing” occur? Was it done at EC’s ‘strong room’ in Accra where all parties had their strong representatives including NPP’s Mac Manu (NPP’s former chairman) even after all the stakeholders had certified the results at all the polling and collation centres? Some ‘pink sheets’ or election result sheets were also alleged not to have been signed by Presiding officers of the EC, who indeed ought to have appended their signatures, but how come NPP’s representatives and that of other political parties signed at least over 25,950 of the ‘pink sheets’?  Was NPP’s representatives compromised in any way? What about the other political parties’ representatives? What about the observers? 

  

How do the Petitioners and NPP expect SC to annul over 4,000,000 votes of voters who had nothing to do with any malpractices and irregularities but who only went through the processes allowed by electoral officers and party representatives to cast their votes? Would it be in anyway legitimate to have such eligible votes expunged, without reasonable justification and substantive remedies, by just 5, 7, 9 or 11 Justices of the SC who themselves know that, under the circumstance, they likely do not have the jurisdiction to do such a thing (Art 42, 1992 constitution)?

Why is it that NPP and the Petitioners’ supporters would still go about demonstrating to have their votes counted when indeed the Petitioners are rather praying the SC to deny some people of their votes? Do the Petitioners really have confidence in the strength of their case and that of the SC at all? Isn’t the Petitioners’ case a colourful representation of bitter losers who are refusing to be better losers? Isn’t it about: (a) Trying to sow a seed of discord in the Ghanaian society? (b) NPP’s leaders deceiving their supporters for letting them down? (c) Preparing the grounds for their 2012 presidential candidate to run on the ticket of NPP again? (d) Trying to create legitimacy crisis in the minds of people? (e) Selfishness and ill-motives on the part of NPP and the Petitioners who know all too well that although the elections might not have been 100% perfect, at whatever rate Nana Akuffo-Addo clearly lost the 7-8 December 2012 general elections on behalf of NPP?

Indeed, given the highly rated nature of the December 2012 elections, no one can honestly compare the credibility of any of the elections ever held in Ghana with that which was recently held.

In fact the unconventional reality is that, without prejudicing the petition before the SC, if SC were to even annul the 4,670,504 eligible votes from 11,916 polling stations at the very least of margins, and shall have to order EC to re-collate or re-run elections in such polling stations where irregularities appeared to have occurred, the NDC and President John Mahama will still be most likely to come out as clear victors. Nevertheless, albeit petty to litigate, NPP must be congratulated because its Petitioners are helping to put EC much on its toes. EC’s Chairman, Dr Kwadwo Afari Gyan, must take some of the issues seriously and use them to further perfect the coveted EC before he finally retires.

  

So then, why wouldn’t luminaries in NPP want to dare to bring their party together to squarely face the future reality instead of fighting non-existing past when existing present doesn’t even seem to have the capacity to provide the needed arsenals to defend and procure its own relevance? Peradventure, your surmise may well be more perfect than mine!