Petitioner deserved to have been given EC’s documents – Dafeamekpor

Member of Parliament for South Dayi, Rockson-Nelson Este Kwami Dafeamekpor, has said that the Supreme Court should not have denied the petitioners in the ongoing election petition hearing, access to the documents of the 1st Respondent, the Electoral Commission (EC).

He said the 1992 Constitution guarantees the right to information hence, the petitioner should have been allowed to have access to the documents in the possession of the elections management body.

His comments come after the apex court dismissed an application filed by lawyers for the petitioner John Dramani Mahama, to inspect documents of the EC.

In dismissing the application on Wednesday, February 3, the Chief Justice Anin Yeboah who read the ruling on behalf of the justices said “the proceedings so far show that the petitioner has copies of the documents which are the subject of this application. We are of the view that no proper case has been established before us to warrant the exercise of our discretion in favour of the applicant.
“Order 29 of CI 47 which is the basis of this application should not be read in isolation, It should be read in conjunction with Rule 11 of the said Order.”

He added that Section 166 of the Evidence Act 323 of 1975 “makes it clear that a duplicate of a document is admissible to the same extent as the original unless a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the duplicate. No issue has been raised against the authenticity of the document in possession of the applicant “

Mr Dafeamekpor said in a tweet reacting to this ruling that“The 1992 Const. guarantees the Right to Information. This was given effect by the enactment of a whole law: the Right to Information Act, 2019, Act 989.

“So why are we still judicially denied this? Unless some privilege is being asserted, all state documents must be discoverable.”

The 1992 Const. guarantees the Right to Information. This was given effect by the enactment of a whole law: the Right to Information Act, 2019, Act 989. So why are we still judicially denied this? Unless some privilege is being asserted, all state documents must be discoverable.

— Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, Esq. MP. (@etsedafeamekpor) February 3, 2021