… As Tsatsu Tsikata tells Ho court in SALL case
Tsatsu Tsikata, counsel for the petitioners representing 17,688 voters from the Hohoe Constituency in the Volta Region, who were excluded from voting on December 7, 2020, has called on the High Court in Ho, to declare the election of John Peter Amewu, as the Member of Parliament (MP), unconstitutional.
This request is part of the final address filed on behalf of the petitioners from the Santrokofi, Akpafu, Lolobi, and Likpe Traditional Areas (SALL).
The Electoral Commission (EC) was required to file its submissions by July 9, 2024, while Mr Amewu, who doubles as the Railway Minister, was given until July 12, 2024. The judgment from Justice Owoahene Acheampong, is expected on July 29, 2024.
On December 23, 2020, Prof. Margaret Kweku, who was the parliamentary candidate of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) in the Hohoe Constituency of the Volta Region and four others, namely; Simon Alan Opoku-Mintah, John Kwame Obimpeh, Godfried Koku Kofie and Felix Quarshie, registered voters in the Santrokofi, Akpafu, Likpe and Lolobi traditional areas in the Oti Region.
The petitioners, had prayed to the Ho High Court, for certain reliefs against the EC as first respondent and 2nd Respondent, Mr Amewu, then the NPP MP Elect for Hohoe Constituency, including an injunction from holding himself as MP.
Mr Tsatsu in his final address, urged the court to declare the election of Mr Amewu, on December 7, 2020, as MP for Hohoe Constituency as void, as required by Section 20 (1) of the Representation of People Law (PNDC Law 284), because of multiple breaches of the Constitution and statute by the EC in the conduct of the election.
The election cannot stand when 17,688 voters in the Constituency, were excluded from voting on December 7, 2020 and denied their fundamental human right to vote.
The court was also asked to certify its decision to the EC, as required by section 22 of the Representation of People Law (PNDC Law 284), so that “a writ shall be issued for a fresh election in the constituency concerned”, the Hohoe Constituency, with voters in the SALL communities being allowed to vote. Counsel further asked the Court to grant an injunction against Mr Amewu, from holding himself out as the MP for Hohoe Constituency.
According to counsel for the 5 petitioners, the grant of these reliefs, would enforce fundamental human rights of the constituents in the SALL communities, specifically their right to vote for the Member of Parliament to represent their constituency and their right to representation in the 8th Parliament of the 4th Republic.
A key contention of counsel is that the Constitutional Instrument numbered 112 (C.I. 112) by which the President created the Oti Region, did not move “Santrokofi, Akpafu, Lolobi and Likpe Traditional Areas” into the Oti Region.
The Constitutional Instrument provided that the new region was “to comprise the districts specified in the Schedule to this Instrument.” Listed in the schedule were eight districts and, then, “Santrokofi, Akpafu, Lolobi and Likpe Traditional Areas”, which were not a district but rather part of the Hohoe Municipality.
On the plain meaning of the C.I., therefore, these SALL areas did not become part of the Oti Region but remained part of the Hohoe Constituency in the Volta Region, one of 275 constituencies established by the Electoral Commission in the Public Elections Regulations, Constitutional Instrument Number 95 of 2016 (C.I. 95).
Counsel for the Petitioners points out that the fact that Santrokofi, Akpafu, Lolobi and Likpe traditional areas were in the Hohoe municipality at the time C.I. 112 was enacted, was admitted by the Electoral Commissions in their response to a request to admit facts. That those areas were part of the Hohoe constituency as established in C.I. 95 is also admitted in the Answers to the Petition filed by the Electoral Commission and Hon Peter Amewu. Furthermore, Counsel for the Petitioners argues that C.I. 95 was never validly revoked, revised, repealed nor otherwise amended, according to counsel, and should have been used for the Parliamentary elections that were held on 7th December 2020.
However, voters in the SALL Traditional Areas, were denied a vote in the Parliamentary election by a press statement that the EC sprang on the public on the evening of December 6, 2020 (just a few hours before the 2020 general election) in which it stated that voters in the SALL area could vote only in the Presidential election.
That decision was implemented by officials of the Commission in the elections on 7th December 2020. By not allowing the voters in the SALL communities to vote in the Hohoe Constituency, Counsel maintains, the Electoral Commission denied them the right to vote, which has been acknowledged by the Supreme Court of Ghana and universally to be a fundamental human right.
That decision, Counsel submits, was also in violation of constitutional provisions governing the work of the Electoral Commission and clearly affected the outcome of the election in which Mr Amewu was declared to have received 26,952 votes as against 21,821 for Prof. Kweku. The Electoral Commission had also acted unfairly, unreasonably and capriciously contrary to Article 23 and Article 296(a) and (b) of the Constitution.
Mr Tsikata, argued that the C.I. 128 of the Electoral Commission could not lawfully place the Santrokofi, Akpafu, Lolobi and Likpe communities under the Buem Constituency in the Jasikan District of the Oti Region for the 7th December 2020 elections, as claimed in the Answers to the Election Petition filed by the Electoral Commission and Mr Amewu.
A very recent press release of the EC dated 16th May 2024 is also referred to by counsel as showing that the Commission now acknowledges that it could not have allowed the voters in the SALL communities to vote in the Buem Constituency, since “the election of the MP for would have violated an Act of Parliament, Act 936, as the MP would have illegally become a member of more than one District Assembly, the Guan District Assembly and the Jasikan District Assembly.”
This press release was a negation of the reliance by the Commission on C.I. 128 in its Answer to the Petition. There was no lawful basis for preventing voters in the SALL Traditional Areas from voting in their existing Hohoe constituency as established by C.I. 95 and from representation in the 8th Parliament of the 4th Republic.
According to counsel for the Petitioners, the EC had no power to create a district and, therefore, C.I. 119, which purported to alter the composition of the Hohoe and Jasikan districts, was invalid.
Mr Tsikata further argues that C.I. 128 could not take out the SALL Traditional Areas from the Hohoe Municipality of the Volta Region and bundle these areas with areas in the Jasikan District of the Oti Region as one constituency. This would be unconstitutional for the further reason that, by virtue of article 47(2) of the 1992 Constitution, “No constituency shall fall within more than one region.”
These and additional submissions on behalf of the petitioners are in the closing address filed by Counsel. It is emphasized that the reliefs sought in the suit are in respect of the Hohoe constituency election only and no other constituency.
