Lawyers for the flag bearer of the People’s National Convention (PNC), Dr Edward Mahama, have written to the Electoral Commission (EC) to reverse its decision to disqualify him from contesting in the December 7 presidential elections.They have given the election management body 48 hours to reverse the decision, failing which they will resort to court to address the issue.
Dr Mahama was one of 13 flag bearers who were disqualified from contesting in the elections.
They include Nana Konadu Agyeman-Rawlings of the National Democratic Party (NDP), the All People's Congress’ (APC), Hassan Ayariga; Dr Agyenim Boateng of the United Front Party (UFP); Kofi Akpaloo of the Independent People's Party (IPP); and Kwabena Adjei of the Reformed Patriotic Democrats (RPD) were disqualified.
The other contestants who were dropped in the race include: Dr Papa Kwesi Nduom of the Progressive People’s Party (PPP); Mr Richard Nixon Tetteh (United Development Systems Party); Thomas Ward-Brew of the Democratic People’s Party (DPP); Alfred Kwame Asiedu Walker, an independent candidate, and Akua Donkor of the Ghana Freedom Party (GFP).
Out of the 13, Dr Nduom, Mrs Rawlings and Dr Henry Lartey of the Great Consolidated Popular Party (GCPP) have sued the EC in court over their disqualification.
Should Dr Mahama also follow through with his suit, he will become the fourt flag bearer to take that action. A letter written on his behalf to the EC by his lawyer Dr Raymond Atuguba read in part: “In the event that the EC insists that the minor errors in the nomination forms of our clients are enough to bar the candidature of our client, we will require access to the nomination forms of all other candidates in order to point out similar minor errors that should have equally disqualified them if the EC were acting within the remit of Article 17, 23, 33, 55, and 296 of the 1992 constitution.”
“If after 48 hours of receipt of this letter, you fail to commit unequivocally to meeting the above demands, we shall proceed and resort to other lawful processes or avenues to vindicate our client’s right without further recourse to you. It is the considered view of our client that the erosion of the constitutional right, human right, political right, legal right, right to administrative due process, and the compromise of our multiparty democratic dispensation by the purported rejection of the nomination forms of our client is not to be done lightly and on the basis of dubious fact and a far less than optimal interpretation of the law.
“Finally, in the event that any notice is required by any law or rule of practice for the institution of any legal proceedings against you, this letter shall constitute such notice.”