Article 94 (2A): Why the NPP has no case!

Supremo Mensa 1 The writer, Supremo Mensa

Thu, 3 Feb 2022 Source: Supremo Mensa

1. The NPP under the leadership of Nana Akufo-Addo in an evil manner at all cost to pass their shambolic, retrogressive, illegal and recessive electronic levy, which current research shows over 56 percent of NPP members and over 73 percent of Ghanaians by a survey have given a NO vote, has ignited passions to get the numbers of the NDC minority reduced in order to bulldoze their way through.

2. Even though the sitting Government, intolerant as it exhibits may have its way sometimes, other instances especially where the law ought to take its cause may be exclusive.

3. Article 94 (2A) states "A person shall not be qualified to be a member of Parliament if he owes allegiance to a country other than Ghana." This is simple and straightforward. The keyword remains allegiance and not citizenship.

This is what the NPP seems not to understand. Allegiance is simply abstract and has nothing to do with citizenship otherwise it will be unnecessary for office holders of the three arms of government to swear an oath of allegiance even when constitutionally they are citizens of Ghana.

4. In a better explanation to a layman's understanding, it is as though after a doctor has confirmed the death of an individual, the person still possesses life so far as his or her death certificate is not ready. This is what the NPP is trying to make us believe.

5. This is why during the hearing of the case at the cape coast high court, even though we knew the court in the first place did not have the jurisdiction to preside over such case having issues of interpretation and enforcement of a constitutional provision, something only the Supreme Court has the exclusive jurisdiction (article 130 1a of Ghana's constitution), we went further and invoked article 1(2) of the Evidence Act of Ghana.

We were of the view that all these hullabaloos could be settled by bringing in a witness with much knowledge of the Canadian law; what is termed an expert witness.

Section 1(2) of the Evidence Act of Ghana states that a foreign law is a question of fact and can only be determined at the trial stage by expert evidence. All these constitutional steps were thrown away yet we have the NPP side trying to deceive Ghanaians to believe their inconsistent statements.

6. The law is clear and emphatic and we will sail through after the interpretation of article 94 (2A) by the Supreme Court. The honorable member of Parliament for the Assin North remains duly elected and nothing skewed from the NPP side shall rescind that.

7. What instead the ruling government must see to is ensuring the EC creates a Constituency for the people of SALL and follow with an election so they have a representation. This is the cardinal sin. This is what ought to be the priority. Meanwhile, fuel prices seem to be breaking the 8, public Universities are on the blink of closing down and the winds of unbearable hardship are blowing massively. The ordinary Ghanaian deserves better!

Columnist: Supremo Mensa
Related Articles: