<<Print>>

An Accra High Court judge has told the Electoral Commission (EC) of Ghana to make way for the Presidential Candidate of the Progressive People’s Party to correct anomalies cited on his nomination form.

The court said the EC breached the law of natural justice in disqualifying Dr Nduom from the race, and, therefore, asked the election management body to allow him to make the necessary corrections on his nomination forms.

Dr Nduom, according to the EC, was disqualified because “the number of subscribers to his forms did not meet the requirements of Regulation 7 (2) (b) of CI 94".

The PPP then filed a lawsuit seeking to restrain the EC from proceeding with the balloting for positions of presidential candidates.

But on Friday, His Lordship Kyei Baffuor sitting at the Commercial Court 7, made it clear that the EC should have given Dr Nduom an opportunity to correct anomalies on his nomination form before disqualifying him.

"I will proceed after quashing the decision of the Respondents disqualifying the Applicant as a candidate and order that the Respondents afford opportunity to the Applicant to make the necessary alteration or amendment to its nomination paper for it to receive same and then proceed to determine whether the Applicant had met all the criteria laid down by the laws of the Republic, in line with its duty laid down by C.I. 94. EC has no basis to complain that nomination period has closed when they did not set one. They only set nomination day under regulation 7 but not nomination period under regulation 9(2) as I have already found. The time frame to afford the Applicant is entirely within the discretion of the Respondents being mindful of the limited time available for the elections on December 7, 2016," Justice Eric K. Baffour, Esq ruled.


Details Of Dr Nduom's Disqualification:

- One subscriber Richard Aseda (‘Asida’ on the Voters’ Register), with Voter ID no 7812003957) endorsed the forms in two different districts (pages 21 and 39).

The subscriber 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.

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 impersonation in respect of election.”

The PPP took the case to court seeking “an order directed against the 1st respondent in her capacity as returning officer for presidential elections to grant the applicant the opportunity to amend and alter the one anomaly found in his nomination papers as well as accept his nomination papers as amended or altered to enable him contest as a presidential candidate for the 7th December 2016 elections.”

The court, on October 28th, ruled that the EC did not give the PPP fair opportunity to amend mistakes on their nomination forms.