The Member of Parliament for South Dayi, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamkepor has gone to the Supreme Court over the appointment of two new members– Hajia Salima Ahmed Tijani and Dr Peter Appiahene– to the Electoral Commission’s Board.
The lawmaker added the Electoral Commission and the Attorney General of the Republic of Ghana as defendants in his writ.
He is among other things seeking the revocation of the appointment and an order that restrains the two board members from holding themselves out as such.
The appointment of the two by the President, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo has been criticized by a section of the public and some civil society organizations including the Coalition for Democratic Election Observers (CODEO) who have called on the president to rescind the appointments due to their affiliation with the governing New Patriotic Party.
The opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) has already written to the Council of State to reconsider its advice to the President on the appointment of the two new board members since it further dents the already soiled reputation of the electoral management body.
In Mr. Dafeamkepor’s suit sighted by Citi News, he is seeking the following reliefs:
1. A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of the letter and spirit of Articles 23, 44(1), 45, 46, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, a person is not qualified to be a member of the 3rd Defendant Commission if that person is a known sympathizer, a member or openly affiliates or identifies with a registered political party in Ghana.
2. A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of the letter and spirit of Articles 23, 44(1), 45, 46, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, a person who is a known sympathizer or member or who openly affiliates or identifies with a registered political party will be biased or prejudiced in his constitutional duties as a member of the 3rd Defendant Commission.
3. A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of the letter and spirit of Articles 23, 44(1), 45, 46, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, a person must be neutral, impartial, fair-minded and non-partisan to qualify as a member of the 3rd Defendant Commission.
4. A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of the letter and spirit of Articles 23, 44(1), 45, 46 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the 1st and 2nd Defendants are open sympathizers and affiliates of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and therefore not qualified to be members of the 3rd Defendant Commission.
5. A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of the letter and spirit of Articles 23, 44(1), 45, 46 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the appointment of the 1st and 2nd Defendants by the President of the Republic of Ghana as members of the 3rd Defendant Commission is contrary to the letter and spirit of Articles 23, 44(1), 45, 46 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana and therefore null and void.
6. An order revoking the appointment of the 1st and 2nd Defendants by the President of the Republic of Ghana as members of the 3rd Defendant Commission.
7. An order of interlocutory injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd Defendants from acting as, or holding themselves out as members of the 3rd Defendant Commission pending the determination of the suit.
8. An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd Defendants from acting as, or holding themselves out as members of the 3rd Defendant Commission.
9. Any further Order(s) or direction(s) as this Honourable Court may deem necessary.
