Supreme court endorses akufo-addo?

It is a widely accepted legal opinion that JUSTICE must always be seen to have been done. And for many in the legal profession, the reliance on this opinion is a massive defence for their clients especially in high profile cases such as a Presidential Election Petition.

Nana Akufo-Addo shared an opinion in his quest to ‘genuinely’ seek justice for himself, his family and purportedly the people of Ghana.

Nana Akufo-Addo reaffirmed his trust and believe in the Constitutional rights of the Ghanaian Voter as against the adminitrative duties of an Electoral officer on the very day of filing his petition at the Supreme Court – 28th December 2012.

Nana Akufo-Addo summarizes such rights as “…i*n the entire process, we must never forget that it is the casting of the ballot that is sacred. The rest of the activities are at best administrative duties. The count, the collation, the declaration of results cannot and should not be more important than the sacred, God-given right of a citizen casting his or her ballot”*.

In accentuating his defence for the Ghanaian voter, Nana Akufo-Addo who is known for his beliefs in human rights added “...*in emphasizing the importance of elections, it must be pointed out that the sanctity of the ballot is and must be supreme. In an election we cast votes, then the votes are counted, the count is collated, the results are announced and formal declaration of results is made”.*

He added again that *“elections are about those who cast the vote, not those who count, not those who supervise, not those who transmit and not those who declare. The heart of the democratic process is about those who cast the vote”*

In sum, the notorious freedom fighter was telling the people of Ghana to resist any attempt to cancel their votes due to administrative errors committed by whoever supervised the elections.

The Justices of the Supreme Court seems to have endorsed such an opinion in their ruling on the late filing of written address by the clients of the National Democratic Congress.

Reading the undivided decision of the court, William Atuguba JSC stated among other things “…*in the fact that, the sins of counsel should not be visited on the head of the client and that in the convenience of the court, which was the mischief aimed at in defaulting to comply with the time limit set, and the sheer magnitude and gravity of the case. Therefore, we waive the default and admit the address as filed by on behalf third respondent*.”

The questions arising therefore are;

1. Should the refusal of an electoral officer to sign a declaration form deprive an innocent voter his right to her or his preffered leader?

2. Should an innocent voter be punished because the Electoral Commission allegedly printed double serial numbers on declaration forms?

3. Must geniune votes be trashed simply because electoral officers did not know how to fill declaration forms?

The answers for the above questions are obvious and could best be provided by Nana Akufo-Addo but it is important that we all wait for Supreme Court’s verdict based on the evidence and facts adduced before it.

Let all the people of Ghana wait for the verdict of the Supreme Court and be ready to accept it wholeheartedly.

Brogya Genfi

NDC Youth Activist

egenfi@gmail.com