PPP to serve EC judgment on disqualification on Monday

The Progressive People’s Party(PPP) has indicated it will initiate the process to correct anomalies on their forms filed for the Presidential elections on Monday.

The move follows a decisive court judgment the party won over the electoral commission after its flagbearer, Dr. Paa Kwesi Nduom was disqualified by the EC.

The General Secretary of the party, Murtala Mohammed in an interview with Accra-based Citi FM said the party is eager to get back onto the ballot paper for the December 7, Presidential polls.

“We are in a hurry more than anybody. You know they are slowing down our campaign and there is propaganda going down against our candidate that you people you have no head;fish without head, they have disqualified you, go and rest and all that. So we’re in a hurry to kill that propaganda. So I tell you by Monday afternoon, we should be able to serve the EC with the judgment.”

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 details are as follows:

– 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 said the EC did not give the PPP fair opportunity to amend mistakes on their nomination forms.