<<Print>>

A spokesperson for the National Democratic Congress (NDC’s) Election Petition to the Supreme Court, lawyer Godwin Edudzi Tamakloe says those accusing the largest opposition party of making similar mistakes to that of the Electoral Commission in their petition are missing the point.

According to him, it is wrong for some NPP members and some section of Ghanaians to equate the mistakes made in the petition of the NDC to the Supreme Court to that of the Electoral Commission (EC) going contrary to the constitutional provision under article 63.

Speaking on Okay FM’s Ade Akye Abia Morning Show, the private legal practitioner argued that the EC's work is not a divine instruction like the 10 commandments given to Moses by God Almighty, but rather by a constitution that spells out the mandate of the Commission.

He stressed that the Electoral Commission (EC) going contrary to the article 63 in the 1992 Constitution should not be taken as a mere mistake as seen in the petition of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) to the Supreme Court.

“I have heard the commentary that we should admit that people make mistakes and so it was a mere mistake on the part of the EC with the figures, and so is with our petition to the Supreme Court. The work of the EC is not a divine instruction like the 10 Commandments given to Moses by God Almighty, but in Ghana we are all guided by the Constitution in running the affairs of the country, and the article 63 of the constitution empowers the EC to work. So, if the EC makes a move contrary to the constitution, no one should say that anybody can make mistakes," he said.

Touching on the amendment that the opposition NDC seeks to do in its petition to the Supreme Court, Lawyer Edudzi Tamakloe said that his party has the power to amend its petition in accordance with the establishment of the CI91, rule 66(7).  

“We have established a law, what we call CI91 and it has what we call rule 66(7) and the rule 66 talks about a bit of an amendment. It is such that the amendment you are doing cannot alter or add to the grounds that you file your case”.

“My understanding of the reason for this is that, in 2012 around December 27, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, Bawumia and the late Obetsebi Lamptey filed a petition and the first petition they filed was empty and many legal scholars said that the petition should have been dismissed immediately but for good judicial reasons it was not,” he justified.

He explained that the amendment helps the petitioners to correct and beef up the petition which was earlier filed to lock the 21 days period.

He added that before the CI47, one cannot amend a petition to the court but now with the permission of the court, a petitioner can even file an amendment, providing a judgement has not been given already.

“If you look at the process we have filed at the Supreme Court which they have given us January 14 to appear, it is just to effect a correction, instead of 1st and 2nd respondents that we interchanged. That is basically what it is. It is not about amending the crowned or adding additional information to the crowned,” he indicated.