Does the Supreme Court need to make its judgements more clear?

Read Comments Comments (6)

• Okonko Palm 7 years ago

  As much as Cameron tried to simplify things in a journalistic lay man's language,he would be surprised that what he thought were the orders and mode of implementation were not that at all.
  
  Like they say the devil is in the ...
  read full comment

  As much as Cameron tried to simplify things in a journalistic lay man's language,he would be surprised that what he thought were the orders and mode of implementation were not that at all.
  
  Like they say the devil is in the details and if he should be open minded and listen to the other side of the argument his conclusion may quickly reflect his ignorance of what had gone on.The matter is more complex with many twists and turns to qualify for your simplistic interpretation of that complex ruling.
  
  What I agree with you though is that the sc must stop blowing hot and cold in their attempt to show neutrality.The supreme court is not a platform for legal sophistry.The ruling you said must be clear in a clear language without the complex web and the dance of seven veils to unveil the real meaning.

  reply
• Kofi Ata, Cambridge, UK 7 years ago

  Cameron Duodu, the SC judgement is very clear and I am surprised you of all brilliant journalists of the past has not read it. I am also not a lawyer but when I read the written judgement, there was no ambiguity in my underst ...
  read full comment

  Cameron Duodu, the SC judgement is very clear and I am surprised you of all brilliant journalists of the past has not read it. I am also not a lawyer but when I read the written judgement, there was no ambiguity in my understanding of what the SC ordered. That is exactly what SCJ Dotse said. It has been made complex by those who have put party political interest into the ruling. I will suggest that you download a copy of the written judgement from the EC's website and you will agree with me that it is not complex.

  reply
• KKO 7 years ago

  Kofi,
  I also do not see any problem with the SC Orders, except that our education system seems to be churching out "instructed" illiterates!
  
  The result is that we proceed to grant the following reliefs:
  
  {1} That upon a ...
  read full comment

  Kofi,
  I also do not see any problem with the SC Orders, except that our education system seems to be churching out "instructed" illiterates!
  
  The result is that we proceed to grant the following reliefs:
  
  {1} That upon a true the and proper interpretation of article 45 (a) of the Constitution the mandate of the Electoral Commission to compile the register of voters implies a duty to compile a reasonably accurate and credible register.
  
  {2} A declaration that the current register of voters which contains
  the names of persons who have not established qualification to
  be registered is not reasonably accurate or credible.
  
  {3} A declaration that the current register of voters which contains
  the names of persons who are deceased is not reasonably accurate or credible.
  
  {4} Reliefs (4) (a) and (b) are dismissed in their entirety.
  In the exercise of the power conferred on us under article 2(2) of the
  Constitution, we make the following orders:
  
  {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.
  
  (SGD) N. S. GBADEGBE
  JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT

  reply
• BOY KOFI 7 years ago

  Local dialect will be the easiest way to understand the ruling.The Supreme Court didn't order the EC to simply delete the names of ineligible voter from ther voters register witout conditions.This is what the author of this a ...
  read full comment

  Local dialect will be the easiest way to understand the ruling.The Supreme Court didn't order the EC to simply delete the names of ineligible voter from ther voters register witout conditions.This is what the author of this article has refused to understand.Precisely,the Supreme Court ordered the EC to delete or clean the register "in compliance with the provisons of the 1992 Constitution,and by applicable laws of Ghana".What are the provisions of the 1992 Constitution?What are the laws of Ghana?The bottom line is that the SC has dismissed Abu Ramadan's petition for a fresh register and has given the EC the green light to clean the register with aplicable laws. Therefore,it's wrong for anybody to say that the EC must delete the names of NHIS Card holders without the provisons of the Constitution and applicable laws of Ghana.Afterall,there is no credible evidence in court that some foreigners voted in 2012 with such cards.All these stories about foreigners holding NHIS cards to register have not been proven in any court of juridiction.That's why I call it Ananse story.Thank you.

  reply
• Asantrofie Acquah 7 years ago

  How you write people read and get humbled by youur wisdom. I wish you could use the same abundance of wisdom endowed you by the Mighty One to tell that stinky butt at the chair of the EC to comply with the orders of the Supr ...
  read full comment

  How you write people read and get humbled by youur wisdom. I wish you could use the same abundance of wisdom endowed you by the Mighty One to tell that stinky butt at the chair of the EC to comply with the orders of the Supreme Court before she get her fucking asshole buried by my boys.

  reply
• nana addo 7 years ago

  Uncle Duodu we are not in the post independence period when you reigned supreme.
  You are just expressing your own views.Good but do not pontificate and sound condescending.

  Uncle Duodu we are not in the post independence period when you reigned supreme.
  You are just expressing your own views.Good but do not pontificate and sound condescending.

  reply