Your analysis is interesting and could be a way out by the court to invalidate the whole election..
Your analysis is interesting and could be a way out by the court to invalidate the whole election..
Kofi Ata, Cambridge, UK 12 years ago
Good Morning SARPONG. After reading my comment which you quoted in your article, perhaps, I should have been a bit careful. Instead of saying that the "No Biometric Verification, No Vote" WILL be ruled unconstitutional, I sho ... read full comment
Good Morning SARPONG. After reading my comment which you quoted in your article, perhaps, I should have been a bit careful. Instead of saying that the "No Biometric Verification, No Vote" WILL be ruled unconstitutional, I should have said COULD be ruled unconstitutional. All the same, I left the final decision for the Justices since the law is in their bosom.
We should not take it for granted that because some sections of the Constitutional Instrument/s regulating the 2012 elections have been ruled unconstitutional, the rest or parts therein will be ruled unconstitutional. This is not automatic and in fact, the nine Justices hearing the presidential petition could take a (different) view that the "No Biometric Verification, No Vote" is constitutional.
In my view, it is highly unlikely that the whole Constitutional Instrument/s under which the 20012 elections were held would be ruled unconstitutional and therefore make the 2012 general elections or presidential election unconstitutional. In fact, that is not one of the reliefs being sought by the petitioners. Such a ruling would be bizarre and make Ghana a laughing stock.
I am also not sure if citizens who were unnecessarily or unconstitutionally disenfranchised because of the failure of the Biometric Verification Machines to identify them have good grounds to seek redress by suing the Electoral Commission, unless they can prove that the EC was negligent by imposing such unconstitutional condition. Again, such citizens must prove that the decision was irrational and no rational person or organisation could have made such a decision. Moreover, the question we should answer is, what is the totality of those who were unable to exercise their constitutional rights because of such constitutional imposition and was it significant enough to have affected the final outcome? If not, then, though it's a serious constitutional infringement, it becomes a mere unfortunate matter. Nothing more nothing less. Last but not the least, the Constitution may not contain provisions for the type of remedy that such citizens can seek. It is therefore highly unlikely that such action will be successful
In other words, we should not read too much into yesterday's SC ruling and its impact on the ongoing petition and the 2012 general elections.
In my view, the most likely impact is the potential for a protracted petition that could be longer than expected because with this ruling the whichever party loses the petition could not seek a review of the decision.
SARPONG 12 years ago
Your last point about the significance of the numbers denied to vote not be high enough to void the election is not tenable in law. In this case, it the numbers denied is not important but using a wrong law to conduct al elec ... read full comment
Your last point about the significance of the numbers denied to vote not be high enough to void the election is not tenable in law. In this case, it the numbers denied is not important but using a wrong law to conduct al election that deprived voters their right to vote is the issue. The ruling cannot be automatic as the Supreme Court can also accept the CI 75 but the issue of the constitutional provision, article 42 guaranteeing everybody in Ghana who is a citizen above the age of 18 and of a sound mind poses a problem for Mahama's s presidency if somebody challenges the CI 75 in court.
PHILTY McNASTY 12 years ago
Yaaa Mahama. Nkofen nkoaa all over the place.
Yaaa Mahama. Nkofen nkoaa all over the place.
Kwame Wi 12 years ago
You two (most sensible in the forum) make me laugh. The constitution defines who can vote but not how if I'm right. How election is conducted is vested in the EC. Can you say you are a 40yr man, registered to vote, but could ... read full comment
You two (most sensible in the forum) make me laugh. The constitution defines who can vote but not how if I'm right. How election is conducted is vested in the EC. Can you say you are a 40yr man, registered to vote, but could not vote b'cos the EC would not let you after 5pm? Or denied to vote bcos you wanted to use foot to do the thumbing? CI 75 is valid and legal
Daniel Ofori-Dankwa 12 years ago
@KWAME WI : you are partially right; the only thing is do not deny them right to vote "if other means of verification are available". other laws and cases support this.
@KWAME WI : you are partially right; the only thing is do not deny them right to vote "if other means of verification are available". other laws and cases support this.
Yaw Amofa 12 years ago
What that ruling means is that any CI seeking to annull any citizen of Ghana's vote will quashed by the Supreme Court. The constitution guarantees the vote of every citizen!! Bastards! Mmmoa mma! Nkwasiafo)!!
What that ruling means is that any CI seeking to annull any citizen of Ghana's vote will quashed by the Supreme Court. The constitution guarantees the vote of every citizen!! Bastards! Mmmoa mma! Nkwasiafo)!!
Concerned Citizen 12 years ago
Is your eczema itching you or something? Why the insults? You are not intelligent enough like the rest of the people here to make your dissenting view known without insults?
I bet your father if you have one will be proud ... read full comment
Is your eczema itching you or something? Why the insults? You are not intelligent enough like the rest of the people here to make your dissenting view known without insults?
I bet your father if you have one will be proud of you.
Yaw Amofa 12 years ago
Im just like your gay father who instead of fucking your bloody mother, hired a mad man to do it for him, and the result is a misfit like you! You dont even know your father! I pity you.
Im just like your gay father who instead of fucking your bloody mother, hired a mad man to do it for him, and the result is a misfit like you! You dont even know your father! I pity you.
Concerned Citizen 12 years ago
As I said, your father will be proud of your stupidity if you have one.
As I said, your father will be proud of your stupidity if you have one.
Jon 12 years ago
This could be the easier way for the judges to declare the whole election process null and void.
Since the constitution is supreme, thus overrides the secondary laws enacted by any other entities like the EC, as you said, ... read full comment
This could be the easier way for the judges to declare the whole election process null and void.
Since the constitution is supreme, thus overrides the secondary laws enacted by any other entities like the EC, as you said, those polling station results which were cancelled owing to the 'No verification' mantra could 'undo' this election.
Mohammed Dimbie 12 years ago
Who will be ruling Ghana until new elections can be held? You and your family of drunkards?
Who will be ruling Ghana until new elections can be held? You and your family of drunkards?
Jon 12 years ago
Why won't the country sink to the state we have now with nincompoops and fellows with feces as brain matter like yourself?
How could you know the constitution caters for such eventualities. When fellas with above average a ... read full comment
Why won't the country sink to the state we have now with nincompoops and fellows with feces as brain matter like yourself?
How could you know the constitution caters for such eventualities. When fellas with above average and off the charts IQs are deliberating, baboons like yourself with inconsequential IQs should desist from muttering irrelevant and ignorant absurdities.
Kwasia beba kwa!!
MAKA 12 years ago
speaker of parliament
chief justices.....
speaker of parliament
chief justices.....
Jon 12 years ago
In this case, the chief justice would hold the fort since this very parliament could also be declared null and void, thus no speaker of parliament.
In this case, the chief justice would hold the fort since this very parliament could also be declared null and void, thus no speaker of parliament.
Artillery 12 years ago
Mahama will still be acting President until everything is sorted...remember he was President before the elections ...so he will still be holding the fort...not any Chief Justice ...as she is not a constitutional Head of State ... read full comment
Mahama will still be acting President until everything is sorted...remember he was President before the elections ...so he will still be holding the fort...not any Chief Justice ...as she is not a constitutional Head of State ...Mahama is.
DAN 12 years ago
dick sucking monkeys like your will burn in hell for etrnity for TRYING to Steal an election! So go back to bush you money and make sure you eating a banana and not sucking a white man;s penis!
dick sucking monkeys like your will burn in hell for etrnity for TRYING to Steal an election! So go back to bush you money and make sure you eating a banana and not sucking a white man;s penis!
C.Y. ANDY-K 12 years ago
Why spend time insulting people instead of writing to point out any loopholes in what someone wrote? I wonder why those who used all kinds lewd words to insult people they don't know here think they are better persons than th ... read full comment
Why spend time insulting people instead of writing to point out any loopholes in what someone wrote? I wonder why those who used all kinds lewd words to insult people they don't know here think they are better persons than those they insult! Better in what? Intelligence, knowledge, looks, birth or social class, or whatever?
At times, it is even glaring that they cannot even write appreciable good English, betraying them as semi-illiterates! And the kind of words they use easily betray their low social backgrounds and self esteem!
Just stop the insults! They stink to the high heavens and portray us Ghanaians in a very bad light to outsiders who visit Ghanaweb.
Andy-K
Mohammed Dimbie 12 years ago
Your analysis is useless and won't wash with anybody. Your understanding of issues is porous as well. Foolish goon!!
Your analysis is useless and won't wash with anybody. Your understanding of issues is porous as well. Foolish goon!!
DAN 12 years ago
go to hell you dicksucking monkey
go to hell you dicksucking monkey
Kofi Sarpong, Peckham, London 12 years ago
I am surprised that you have resorted to insults. Justice has given some of us something else to consider. If you cannot make any meaningful contribution, do not insult. Ah! Some Ghanaians. Aba!
I am surprised that you have resorted to insults. Justice has given some of us something else to consider. If you cannot make any meaningful contribution, do not insult. Ah! Some Ghanaians. Aba!
////////// 12 years ago
DREAM ON SARPONG
DREAM ON SARPONG
Good Citizen 12 years ago
mesu me mamo errors oo yaa bawumia
mesu me mamo errors oo yaa bawumia
Good Citizen 12 years ago
wishful thinking, wake up and smell the coffee.
wishful thinking, wake up and smell the coffee.
DAN 12 years ago
only some states require id card..others just that your are listed as voter for that area!
only some states require id card..others just that your are listed as voter for that area!
Adolf Hitler 12 years ago
Idiot to the fullest. U dont think on ur own
Idiot to the fullest. U dont think on ur own
Concerned Citizen 12 years ago
Did you think for him? Idiots like you need a requisite IQ score to participate in a debate in the forum.
Did you think for him? Idiots like you need a requisite IQ score to participate in a debate in the forum.
Bekaaliba 12 years ago
Your analysis is just idiotic. I wonder if you even understand what you intended saying since your reference point rather favour President Mahama while your conclusion remains idiotic. It is a pity.
Your analysis is just idiotic. I wonder if you even understand what you intended saying since your reference point rather favour President Mahama while your conclusion remains idiotic. It is a pity.
George 12 years ago
You sound like a makaranta graduate because you did not understand what you read in this article.
You sound like a makaranta graduate because you did not understand what you read in this article.
BOY KOFI 12 years ago
Nana Addo must now tell his supporters the truth that Prez Mahama won the elections fairly.All the book long english in court will not help NPP.Now that Bawumia's mountain of evidence has confirmed that Prez Mahama did not st ... read full comment
Nana Addo must now tell his supporters the truth that Prez Mahama won the elections fairly.All the book long english in court will not help NPP.Now that Bawumia's mountain of evidence has confirmed that Prez Mahama did not steal anything from Nana Addo,I think the game is over.I don't see the logic of going to run another elections for nothing now.Nana Addo must concede defeat and allow NPP to prepare better for 2016 general elections.Thank you.
Munir 12 years ago
My brother NPP know that Mahama won this election fairly, but they will drag on to keep Nana Addo on the news ortherwise there will be nothing to talk about.
My brother NPP know that Mahama won this election fairly, but they will drag on to keep Nana Addo on the news ortherwise there will be nothing to talk about.
Kobby 12 years ago
Sarpong is always funny and quick to post articles that suit his political interest.
Only some part of CI 75 would be ruled "of no effect". This does not make Mahama's presidency to cease to exit.
Why do petioners want ... read full comment
Sarpong is always funny and quick to post articles that suit his political interest.
Only some part of CI 75 would be ruled "of no effect". This does not make Mahama's presidency to cease to exit.
Why do petioners want votes annulled whereas CI 75 does not prescribe punishment for a voter who votes without undergoing biometric verification though s/he has a valid ID issued by the EC?
The strategy of NPP is to pick areas Mahama won and find problems with pink sheets and present as 'evidence' in court. The petitioners understanding of the law is flawed.
DR Bawumia knows figures, but he forgot that Tsatsu also his figures.
Even problems exist on the pink sheet, appropriate punishment would be prescribed to the presiding officers and innocent voter would not be punished.
CARDINAL 12 years ago
You were educated yesterday but it seems you have forgotten your lessons so soon.
Any citizen can Sue the EC at the Supreme Court for using the Biometrics verification machine flawed law to prevent some people from voting ... read full comment
You were educated yesterday but it seems you have forgotten your lessons so soon.
Any citizen can Sue the EC at the Supreme Court for using the Biometrics verification machine flawed law to prevent some people from voting and therefore denying them their constitutional rights as enshrined in Article 42 of the constitution which prescribe only a citizen to be 18 and of a sound mind to vote in any election or referendum.
The election of 2012 can lose its eligibility if the Judges use the strict interpretation it used to strike part of CI 74 down which states that the Presidential election is not subject to revision which the Justices have agreed to even before they made that ruling since it was already sitting on the Petitioners case.
Who told you ruling against the use of Biometrics verification will be a punishment againts voters? Where did you Mr " I have taken some law courses " earn your law degree because your argument today is contrary to the argument you put up yesterday.
This case will just be like Mornah's argument in court that, when a primary or secondary law comes in conflict with the Constitutional law, the constitution should reign supreme.
If the section of the CI 75 that prevented some people from voting is found to have been unconstitutional, it then illegitimate the election held on December 7 and 8 as illegitimate and all those who were elected including Parliamentarians can lose their seats for a fresh election to be held.
CONCERNED GHANAIAN 12 years ago
I DOUBT THE POSSIBILITY OF THE PRESIDENT BEING VOTED OUT NO MATTER THE FINDINGS OF THE SC. DID YOU NOTICE THE POWERFUL COUNTRIES WHICH QUICKLY DECLARED THE ELECTIONS FREE AND FAIR AND ENDORSED THE OUTCOME WHILST THE MAIN OPPO ... read full comment
I DOUBT THE POSSIBILITY OF THE PRESIDENT BEING VOTED OUT NO MATTER THE FINDINGS OF THE SC. DID YOU NOTICE THE POWERFUL COUNTRIES WHICH QUICKLY DECLARED THE ELECTIONS FREE AND FAIR AND ENDORSED THE OUTCOME WHILST THE MAIN OPPOSITION WAS ALLEGING VOTE-RIGGING? THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE IN THEIR OWN COUNTRIES AND IN OTHER DEVELOPED COUNTRIES. IN FACT SUCH INTERNAL MEDDLING WEAKENS OUR ONWARD MARCH TO TRUE DEMOCRACY AND SELF-RELIANCE. WELL, MAYBE BECAUSE THESE COUNTRIES DO NOT WANT ANYTHING TO DERAIL THEIR INVESTMENTS AND INTERESTS? AND DO YOU AGREE THAT GHANA, LIKE SOME OTHER AFRICAN COUNTRIES, TO SOME EXTENT, DO NOT DECIDE ON THEIR OWN?
WITH ELECTIONS IN MOST PARTS OF AFRICA, WESTERN COUNTRIES ARE INVITED TO "ENDORSE" A WINNER. THE VOTERS TURN OUT TO BE MERE PUPPETS. SO IF AFARI GYAN IS SHOWING OFF IN THE FACE OF PROOFS OF VOTER ERRORS, IT IS BECAUSE HE KNOWS THEY HAVE THE SUPPORT OF THE POWERFUL COUNTRIES. SADLY, THE LIKES OF HIM DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE WILL OF THE MAJORITY. AS TO WHETHER THE ALLEGED ERRORS WERE ENOUGH TO CHANGE THE OUTCOME, WE CAN KNOW ONLY THROUGH A MORE RIGOROUS CHECK - SOMETHING THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN.
THE CONSTITUTION OF GHANA LACKS WISDOM FOR ALLOWING A DECLARED WINNER TO BE SWORN IN EVEN IN THE FACE OF ALLEGED VOTE-RIGGING AND PENDING COURT CASE CHALLENGING THE RESULT. ONCE SOMEONE TAKES POWER, EVEN IF THE ALLEGATION AGAINST HIM IS TRUE, IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT, IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE, TO UNSEAT HIM IN A COUNTRY LIKE GHANA.
WHAT IS GOING ON NOW WILL NOT CHANGE ANYTHING. BUT IT IS AN EXERCISE FOR THE FUTURE, MORE CERTAINLY FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS.
Nana 12 years ago
Sarpong,please stop drinking!
Sarpong,please stop drinking!
CARDINAL 12 years ago
Thank you Nana for your advice, though I don't need it since I am a teetotaler.
Thank you Nana for your advice, though I don't need it since I am a teetotaler.
Plumber 12 years ago
A little learning is dangerous. What the SC ruling means is that any provision which is found to contradict the spirit of the constitution should be declared null and void. So it is not the whole CI that would go. Yes people ... read full comment
A little learning is dangerous. What the SC ruling means is that any provision which is found to contradict the spirit of the constitution should be declared null and void. So it is not the whole CI that would go. Yes people can take the EC to court for turning them away from voting. Let them come out and prove they were turned away, that their names are on the voters register. There are remedies to all situations. In the case of the Walewale constituencies the number turned away from voting according to DR Bawumia were 2. So how does that change the results? Cancellation of the results mean that all MPs would also lose their seats, and I bet should there be new elections the NDC victory would be more pronounced. That is why the elders say there is an end to litigation.
CARDINAL 12 years ago
I do agree with you that little education is dangerous like yours because you lack analytical ability to understand the law and it came clear in your comment with this quote;
"In the case of the Walewale constituencies the ... read full comment
I do agree with you that little education is dangerous like yours because you lack analytical ability to understand the law and it came clear in your comment with this quote;
"In the case of the Walewale constituencies the number turned away from voting according to DR Bawumia were 2. So how does that change the results?"
First, it is not the numbers that is important if the Supreme Court is to stricke CI 75 Sec 30(2)that requires that the voter shall go through a biometric verification process. First, a lot of people were turned away if you listen to Mahama and some Chiefs in the North who appealed to Afari Gyan to relax that rule but the numbers as I have said is not important but using an illegal law to conduct an election that disenfranchised some people.
Secondly, as I have stated in the article, the EC threw away two polling stations votes away in Nalerigu because two people were found to have voted without verification therefore disenfranchising some people who were eligible to vote.
Third, the case going on in the supreme court is seeking the supreme court to throw more than half a million votes away because these people voted without going through the Biometric voting because those votes, were contaminated by others who voted without the Biometric verification.
Any citizen can Sue the EC at the Supreme Court for using the Biometrics verification machine flawed law to prevent some people from voting and therefore denying them their constitutional rights as enshrined in Article 42 of the constitution which prescribe only a citizen to be 18 and of a sound mind to vote in any election or referendum.
The election of 2012 can lose its eligibility if the Judges use the strict interpretation it used to strike part of CI 74 down which states that the Presidential election is not subject to revision which the Justices have agreed to even before they made that ruling since it was already sitting on the Petitioners case.
Who told you ruling against the use of Biometrics verification will be a punishment againts voters? Where did you Mr " I have taken some law courses " earn your law degree because your argument today is contrary to the argument you put up yesterday.
This case will just be like Mornah's argument in court that, when a primary or secondary law comes in conflict with the Constitutional law, the constitution should reign supreme.
If the section of the CI 75 that prevented some people from voting is found to have been unconstitutional, it then illegitimate the election held on December 7 and 8 as illegitimate and all those who were elected including Parliamentarians can lose their seats for a fresh election to be held.
Whatever 12 years ago
No, Mahama won't lose anything because until a court sits and determines the merit of the other imagined course of action which you just needlessly espoused, your what-if imagination only remains an assumption unless you inte ... read full comment
No, Mahama won't lose anything because until a court sits and determines the merit of the other imagined course of action which you just needlessly espoused, your what-if imagination only remains an assumption unless you intended that to clue someone into doing that. No judge will act in manner as reckless as to anul the whole CI 75 as you imagined to throw this country into a constitutional crises. That is only a figment of your imagination
CARDINAL 12 years ago
"No judge will act in manner as reckless as to anul the whole CI 75"
Did you read the article or as always you read but didn't understand what you read? Below is not the whole of the CI 75 but just a little portion of the ... read full comment
"No judge will act in manner as reckless as to anul the whole CI 75"
Did you read the article or as always you read but didn't understand what you read? Below is not the whole of the CI 75 but just a little portion of the CI 75 that if thrown away as unconstitutional can illegitimize the 2012 election.
"CI 75 Sec 30(2) requires that the voter shall go through a biometric verification process."
I have always believed that, NDC is so sure of Mahama ruling for four years as you succintly wrote;
"No judge will act in manner as reckless as to anul the whole CI 75 as you imagined to throw this country into a constitutional crises. That is only a figment of your imagination"
In some way, you might be right and that is my own fear that, these Judges might be influnced to keep the status quo going to avoid a crisis though not a constitutional one as you imagined but people taking to the streets and misbehaving because if Mahama is removed, there is a constitutional provision that makes the Chief Justice or the Speaker of Parliament as the interim President so there will be no constitutional crisis. Stop using quotes without any basis of merit.
Whatever 12 years ago
"if the CI 75 is thrown out as unconstitutional, it can affect the whole 2012 election as being unconstitutionally conducted. Now I am waiting patiently for somebody in Ghana to challenge the C1 75 in the Supreme Court". Are ... read full comment
"if the CI 75 is thrown out as unconstitutional, it can affect the whole 2012 election as being unconstitutionally conducted. Now I am waiting patiently for somebody in Ghana to challenge the C1 75 in the Supreme Court". Are these my words or yours? Sometimes, I'm tempted to think that some unknown Sarpong writes these articles, not you. Or do you want me to unlearn verbatim what you've written for us to read, digest and run commentaries on?
CARDINAL 12 years ago
The whole CI 75 deals with the rights to vote and what can prevent an individual from voting. The whole CI 75 is subsevient to the Constitutional Article 42 that only stipulates that, any Ghanaian at the age of 18 and above ... read full comment
The whole CI 75 deals with the rights to vote and what can prevent an individual from voting. The whole CI 75 is subsevient to the Constitutional Article 42 that only stipulates that, any Ghanaian at the age of 18 and above with sound mind can vote. The CI 75 rather which is subservient to Article 42 disenfranchised some people from exercising their rights and the election if anybody challeneges its legitimacy can be ruled as null and void, that is the point.
Whatever 12 years ago
The C1 75 refers to VERIFICATION and not biometric verification. Whether that word 'verification' has an explicit meaning which excludes 'biometric' or an implicit meaning which may include 'biometric' would be a matter of di ... read full comment
The C1 75 refers to VERIFICATION and not biometric verification. Whether that word 'verification' has an explicit meaning which excludes 'biometric' or an implicit meaning which may include 'biometric' would be a matter of discernment by the supreme court under advisement and in accordance with the real intentions of parliament in using that word. So the CI 75 itself is not clear and if someone sues on that, there's a higher chance that the judges would disagree with him and say that the verification there has an EXPLICIT and/or IMPLICIT meaning. Before the last election, there had been a number of acceptable ways to verify voters but even then, it did not prevent the downside of verification which is unintended denial or suffrage.
John Dek 12 years ago
When a law is inconsistent with a superior law, it only becomes invalid to the extent of the inconsistency.
All other provisions that do not contracdict the higher law are valid and applicable.
The entire law will never be ... read full comment
When a law is inconsistent with a superior law, it only becomes invalid to the extent of the inconsistency.
All other provisions that do not contracdict the higher law are valid and applicable.
The entire law will never be held invalid because portions of it are superseded by a higher law
CARDINAL 12 years ago
"The entire law will never be held invalid because portions of it are superseded by a higher law"
The subsection of the CI 75 which is inconsistent of the superior law is what was talked about in the article, so what are ... read full comment
"The entire law will never be held invalid because portions of it are superseded by a higher law"
The subsection of the CI 75 which is inconsistent of the superior law is what was talked about in the article, so what are you talking about?
Below is not the entire of the CI 75 but just a little portion of the CI 75 that if thrown away as unconstitutional can illegitimize the 2012 election.
"CI 75 Sec 30(2) requires that the voter shall go through a biometric verification process."
BOY KOFI 12 years ago
Mr Mornah went to court to challenge the Supreme Court that their verdict can be reviewed as enshrine in the constitution.This simply means that anybody who loses the case can call for a review.This possibility was not in exi ... read full comment
Mr Mornah went to court to challenge the Supreme Court that their verdict can be reviewed as enshrine in the constitution.This simply means that anybody who loses the case can call for a review.This possibility was not in existence until Mr Mornah filed his case.In other words,this case can be an endless marathon.Mind you,the law gives 21 days for citizens to challenge electoral results and dispute.If anybody wants to sue the EC,he can go ahead but I don't see what that will bring to Nana Addo.By the way,is NPP losing hope in their own moutain of evidence or what?It's just strange.As for me,I saw it coming that NPP will lose the general elections,petition and even a review.Thank you.
CARDINAL 12 years ago
"Mr Mornah went to court to challenge the Supreme Court that their verdict can be reviewed as enshrine in the constitution."
Stop spending all your time at the refugee office in Paris and go to school because that was not ... read full comment
"Mr Mornah went to court to challenge the Supreme Court that their verdict can be reviewed as enshrine in the constitution."
Stop spending all your time at the refugee office in Paris and go to school because that was not what Mornah's challenge was. Mornah's challenge was not about the Supreme Court ruling but rather it was about a portion of Constitutional instrument CI 74, which is an Electoral law not supreme court ruling.
"This simply means that anybody who loses the case can call for a review."
No, that is not what the Mornah's ruling will do. Mornah's ruling just made this CI 74 portion unconstitutional and not the case the nine members empanelled Justices are sitting on. Read the below ruling carefully.
"But lawyers for Mr Mornah argued that "To the extent that Rule 71B of C.I. 74 seeks to extinguish the constitutional right in article 133 of the Constitution to seek a review of a decision of the Supreme Court in Presidential election petitions, same is unconstitutional, null and void, and of no effect."
Daniel Ofori-Dankwa 12 years ago
1. what if court regards no BIOMETRIC verification no vote as unconstitutional (because OTHER means of verification available)
2. what if no of people (A1) voted without biometric verification are legitimate registered vo ... read full comment
1. what if court regards no BIOMETRIC verification no vote as unconstitutional (because OTHER means of verification available)
2. what if no of people (A1) voted without biometric verification are legitimate registered voters?
3. what if no of people (A2) prevented from voting are considered?
Your analysis is interesting and could be a way out by the court to invalidate the whole election..
Good Morning SARPONG. After reading my comment which you quoted in your article, perhaps, I should have been a bit careful. Instead of saying that the "No Biometric Verification, No Vote" WILL be ruled unconstitutional, I sho ...
read full comment
Your last point about the significance of the numbers denied to vote not be high enough to void the election is not tenable in law. In this case, it the numbers denied is not important but using a wrong law to conduct al elec ...
read full comment
Yaaa Mahama. Nkofen nkoaa all over the place.
You two (most sensible in the forum) make me laugh. The constitution defines who can vote but not how if I'm right. How election is conducted is vested in the EC. Can you say you are a 40yr man, registered to vote, but could ...
read full comment
@KWAME WI : you are partially right; the only thing is do not deny them right to vote "if other means of verification are available". other laws and cases support this.
What that ruling means is that any CI seeking to annull any citizen of Ghana's vote will quashed by the Supreme Court. The constitution guarantees the vote of every citizen!! Bastards! Mmmoa mma! Nkwasiafo)!!
Is your eczema itching you or something? Why the insults? You are not intelligent enough like the rest of the people here to make your dissenting view known without insults?
I bet your father if you have one will be proud ...
read full comment
Im just like your gay father who instead of fucking your bloody mother, hired a mad man to do it for him, and the result is a misfit like you! You dont even know your father! I pity you.
As I said, your father will be proud of your stupidity if you have one.
This could be the easier way for the judges to declare the whole election process null and void.
Since the constitution is supreme, thus overrides the secondary laws enacted by any other entities like the EC, as you said, ...
read full comment
Who will be ruling Ghana until new elections can be held? You and your family of drunkards?
Why won't the country sink to the state we have now with nincompoops and fellows with feces as brain matter like yourself?
How could you know the constitution caters for such eventualities. When fellas with above average a ...
read full comment
speaker of parliament
chief justices.....
In this case, the chief justice would hold the fort since this very parliament could also be declared null and void, thus no speaker of parliament.
Mahama will still be acting President until everything is sorted...remember he was President before the elections ...so he will still be holding the fort...not any Chief Justice ...as she is not a constitutional Head of State ...
read full comment
dick sucking monkeys like your will burn in hell for etrnity for TRYING to Steal an election! So go back to bush you money and make sure you eating a banana and not sucking a white man;s penis!
Why spend time insulting people instead of writing to point out any loopholes in what someone wrote? I wonder why those who used all kinds lewd words to insult people they don't know here think they are better persons than th ...
read full comment
Your analysis is useless and won't wash with anybody. Your understanding of issues is porous as well. Foolish goon!!
go to hell you dicksucking monkey
I am surprised that you have resorted to insults. Justice has given some of us something else to consider. If you cannot make any meaningful contribution, do not insult. Ah! Some Ghanaians. Aba!
DREAM ON SARPONG
mesu me mamo errors oo yaa bawumia
wishful thinking, wake up and smell the coffee.
only some states require id card..others just that your are listed as voter for that area!
Idiot to the fullest. U dont think on ur own
Did you think for him? Idiots like you need a requisite IQ score to participate in a debate in the forum.
Your analysis is just idiotic. I wonder if you even understand what you intended saying since your reference point rather favour President Mahama while your conclusion remains idiotic. It is a pity.
You sound like a makaranta graduate because you did not understand what you read in this article.
Nana Addo must now tell his supporters the truth that Prez Mahama won the elections fairly.All the book long english in court will not help NPP.Now that Bawumia's mountain of evidence has confirmed that Prez Mahama did not st ...
read full comment
My brother NPP know that Mahama won this election fairly, but they will drag on to keep Nana Addo on the news ortherwise there will be nothing to talk about.
Sarpong is always funny and quick to post articles that suit his political interest.
Only some part of CI 75 would be ruled "of no effect". This does not make Mahama's presidency to cease to exit.
Why do petioners want ...
read full comment
You were educated yesterday but it seems you have forgotten your lessons so soon.
Any citizen can Sue the EC at the Supreme Court for using the Biometrics verification machine flawed law to prevent some people from voting ...
read full comment
I DOUBT THE POSSIBILITY OF THE PRESIDENT BEING VOTED OUT NO MATTER THE FINDINGS OF THE SC. DID YOU NOTICE THE POWERFUL COUNTRIES WHICH QUICKLY DECLARED THE ELECTIONS FREE AND FAIR AND ENDORSED THE OUTCOME WHILST THE MAIN OPPO ...
read full comment
Sarpong,please stop drinking!
Thank you Nana for your advice, though I don't need it since I am a teetotaler.
A little learning is dangerous. What the SC ruling means is that any provision which is found to contradict the spirit of the constitution should be declared null and void. So it is not the whole CI that would go. Yes people ...
read full comment
I do agree with you that little education is dangerous like yours because you lack analytical ability to understand the law and it came clear in your comment with this quote;
"In the case of the Walewale constituencies the ...
read full comment
No, Mahama won't lose anything because until a court sits and determines the merit of the other imagined course of action which you just needlessly espoused, your what-if imagination only remains an assumption unless you inte ...
read full comment
"No judge will act in manner as reckless as to anul the whole CI 75"
Did you read the article or as always you read but didn't understand what you read? Below is not the whole of the CI 75 but just a little portion of the ...
read full comment
"if the CI 75 is thrown out as unconstitutional, it can affect the whole 2012 election as being unconstitutionally conducted. Now I am waiting patiently for somebody in Ghana to challenge the C1 75 in the Supreme Court". Are ...
read full comment
The whole CI 75 deals with the rights to vote and what can prevent an individual from voting. The whole CI 75 is subsevient to the Constitutional Article 42 that only stipulates that, any Ghanaian at the age of 18 and above ...
read full comment
The C1 75 refers to VERIFICATION and not biometric verification. Whether that word 'verification' has an explicit meaning which excludes 'biometric' or an implicit meaning which may include 'biometric' would be a matter of di ...
read full comment
When a law is inconsistent with a superior law, it only becomes invalid to the extent of the inconsistency.
All other provisions that do not contracdict the higher law are valid and applicable.
The entire law will never be ...
read full comment
"The entire law will never be held invalid because portions of it are superseded by a higher law"
The subsection of the CI 75 which is inconsistent of the superior law is what was talked about in the article, so what are ...
read full comment
Mr Mornah went to court to challenge the Supreme Court that their verdict can be reviewed as enshrine in the constitution.This simply means that anybody who loses the case can call for a review.This possibility was not in exi ...
read full comment
"Mr Mornah went to court to challenge the Supreme Court that their verdict can be reviewed as enshrine in the constitution."
Stop spending all your time at the refugee office in Paris and go to school because that was not ...
read full comment
1. what if court regards no BIOMETRIC verification no vote as unconstitutional (because OTHER means of verification available)
2. what if no of people (A1) voted without biometric verification are legitimate registered vo ...
read full comment