You are here: HomeNews2016 10 15Article 477674

General News of Saturday, 15 October 2016

Source: Kasapafmonline.com

EC Commissioners are vindictive - PPP

The Progressive People’s Party (PPP) wants an immediate intervention in the disqualification of its presidential candidate in order to avert any possible chaos that may befall the country.

They want the National Chief Imam, the Christian Council of Ghana, the National Peace Council and the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) to put the Commissioners at the Electoral Commission (EC) of Ghana to order so as to sustain the peace the country is enjoying.

In their view, the Commissioners at the EC are vindictive, noting that they are out of control and must be checked.

“Our current EC Commissioners are vindictive to say the least. We call on the silent majority to speak up. We call on the Office of the National Chief Imam, the Christian Council of Ghana, the National Peace Council and the Ghana Bar Association to put the EC to order. The Commission is out of control and could plunge this country into chaos and we need to take steps to reverse this trend,” Policy Director of the Awake Family told journalists at a press conference in Accra on Friday.

He added “Their entrenched posture will lead this country to a point of no return.”

The party’s engagement with the media was to respond to the disqualification of their presidential candidate by the Electoral Commission of Ghana and other matters arising from their dealings with the electoral management body.

On October, 10, 2016, Chairperson of the Electoral Commission, Charlotte Osei pronounced the presidential candidate of the PPP, Dr. Papa Kwesi Nduom disqualified from the December 7 polls for not meeting all the criteria set out by the electoral body.

According to Madam Osei, the EC could not accept Dr. Nduom’s nomination because the number of subscribers to his forms did not meet the requirement of Regulation 7(2)(b) of C. I. 94.

In view of the EC, one subscriber, Richard Aseda (‘Asida’ on the Voters’ Register), with Voter ID number 7812003957 endorsed the forms in two different districts which makes it impossible for Dr. Nduom to meet the subscriber requirement.

The subscriber, the EC added, was found to be on the Voter’s Register in one district, thereby, disqualifying his second subscription and reducing the total number of subscribers to below the minimum required by the law.

“The same subscriber (Richard Aseda (‘Asida’) endorsed the form with different signatures in both portions of the nomination form. This raises questions as to the legitimacy of one or both signatures,” she noted.

She added “We will refer the matter of the possible forgery of the signature(s) to the Ghana Police Service and the Attorney General for investigation and prosecution in line with the following sections of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29): Section 211: Perjury; Section 248: making false declaration etc. for office or voting; Section 251: Deceiving a public officer; Section 256: Corruption, Intimidation and personation in respect of election.”

But the PPP believes what is being used against their presidential candidate is just administrative error which could easily be corrected just like they did for the EC concerning their receipt which was issued after filing their nomination forms.

“The EC gave us nomination forms to complete. It is intriguing that the EC wants to deceive us as an institution incapable of mistakes and committing errors, yet they are not immune from administrative errors. We decided to be silent about this issue but we have been pushed to the wall to disclose what happened to our nomination forms. We wish to state that there was no page 46 and that district is Akuapem North and one other district in the nomination form we received from the EC.”

“However, we in the PPP did not put them to task that the nomination form was illegal and doesn’t qualify to be received. We called the EC to notify them and they proposed an antidote to this error. If the PPP had engaged the Electoral Commission to correct this blunder, why can’t it reciprocate as demanded by Regulation 9 of C.I.94?” the Awake Family quizzed.