Election 2012: NPP to compromise with its adversaries?

Read Comments Comments (20)

• Arthur Haye- USA 12 years ago

  Is the Supreme Court confused? This is not a family issue where parties involved could be advised to go home and settle their case,and then come back to present the results of such arbitration to the court.Tis is a strange de ...
  read full comment

  Is the Supreme Court confused? This is not a family issue where parties involved could be advised to go home and settle their case,and then come back to present the results of such arbitration to the court.Tis is a strange decision from such a respected body.

  reply
• Kojo T 12 years ago

  Why do we not accept the fact that the petition was an NPP losing ruse aimed to confuse its own illiterate supporters? The petition will go no where so the SC in its wisdom has done this to let the NPP withdraw the case. That ...
  read full comment

  Why do we not accept the fact that the petition was an NPP losing ruse aimed to confuse its own illiterate supporters? The petition will go no where so the SC in its wisdom has done this to let the NPP withdraw the case. That will save their face instead of another defeat when the case is thrown out . Another is to avoid violence as a ruling against NDC will bring out their supporters just as the NPP has been threatening to do . I said Kudos to the SC for its wisdom

  reply
• Ewusi 12 years ago

  It is as simple as ABC,NPP says there were
  mistakes in the election results .NDC says the election was clean.The court should determine if what the NPP is saying is true.The NPP was able to prove that over 240,000 foreign v ...
  read full comment

  It is as simple as ABC,NPP says there were
  mistakes in the election results .NDC says the election was clean.The court should determine if what the NPP is saying is true.The NPP was able to prove that over 240,000 foreign votes were misleading

  reply
• Mohammed Dimbie 12 years ago

  You are a confused lot, Ewusi; and probably a drunkard or cocaine sniffer like Akufo-Addo who has lost his bearings.
  
  Where did you get that 240,000 missing vote(r)s from? The EC told the whole world that no Ghanaian voted ...
  read full comment

  You are a confused lot, Ewusi; and probably a drunkard or cocaine sniffer like Akufo-Addo who has lost his bearings.
  
  Where did you get that 240,000 missing vote(r)s from? The EC told the whole world that no Ghanaian voted outside the country. Do you any thing to the contrary? Produce it and stop being stupid.
  
  The NPP's defeated Akufo-Addo cannot prove anything because he has nothing concrete. That is why he is indulging in prayer and fasting sessions and growing lean for nothing!!

  reply
• Ewusi 12 years ago

  Praying and fasting is not a sign of defeat
  Ghanaians will continue to suffer a little while because we still have your likes living among us who sees blue as green.They think they are living in heaven but they live in hell

  Praying and fasting is not a sign of defeat
  Ghanaians will continue to suffer a little while because we still have your likes living among us who sees blue as green.They think they are living in heaven but they live in hell

  reply
• Kofi Wise 12 years ago

  Stupid Mohammed and NDC, clever NPP sought before the SC to determine that EC is not credible. For this matter EC could not prove otherwise. How long should it take you to be able to read between the lines. Then, you are lost ...
  read full comment

  Stupid Mohammed and NDC, clever NPP sought before the SC to determine that EC is not credible. For this matter EC could not prove otherwise. How long should it take you to be able to read between the lines. Then, you are lost completely.

  reply
• bembem 12 years ago

  you must reason before you talk.you can not just insult Nana Addo Dankwah anyhow you want.You are really fool.Have you ever heard from Nana Addo Dankwah insulting any politician in Ghana?Talk with common sense.Fool

  you must reason before you talk.you can not just insult Nana Addo Dankwah anyhow you want.You are really fool.Have you ever heard from Nana Addo Dankwah insulting any politician in Ghana?Talk with common sense.Fool

  reply
• Tetteh 12 years ago

  Mhama who doesn't know law misdjuged by stealing from a lawyer Nana Addo

  Mhama who doesn't know law misdjuged by stealing from a lawyer Nana Addo

  reply
• Fo Kwaku - Tanyingbe 12 years ago

  NDC/MAHAMA SHALL NEVER

  NDC/MAHAMA SHALL NEVER

  reply
• Dziko Kwame 12 years ago

  Fo Korku
  
  Alekee nye Nederlands?
  
  Greetings

  Fo Korku
  
  Alekee nye Nederlands?
  
  Greetings

  reply
• Matthew 12 years ago

  SC already knows that it will have to wield a big stick,but meanwhile it will allow them a chance to sort thinks out.

  SC already knows that it will have to wield a big stick,but meanwhile it will allow them a chance to sort thinks out.

  reply
• Kumah Moses Duut 12 years ago

  I think i perfectly agree with Dr. Bokor's analysis of the way the Supreme Court is going with the election pettition as well as its impact regarding the parties involved. I must also be quick to add that the SC is being smar ...
  read full comment

  I think i perfectly agree with Dr. Bokor's analysis of the way the Supreme Court is going with the election pettition as well as its impact regarding the parties involved. I must also be quick to add that the SC is being smart here. So far, there are interesting developments from this case. I confede in the SC to handle this case in a more expedient way because i believe this process will strenghten Ghana's Democratic dispensation.

  reply
• Kofi Asaase Asa--- Mantukwa 12 years ago

  Dr. Michael Bokor has made a good analysis without his usual...
  
  Thank you, Dr. Michael Bokor. Continue this good intellectual exposition
  
  Now the actual issue, the smoldering fire, which, if not properly attended to, c ...
  read full comment

  Dr. Michael Bokor has made a good analysis without his usual...
  
  Thank you, Dr. Michael Bokor. Continue this good intellectual exposition
  
  Now the actual issue, the smoldering fire, which, if not properly attended to, could set Ghana into a conflagration, 'The Supreme Court Decision'.
  
  Let us consider this analogy.
  
  A father has two sons. One of them , the younger one,goes to the father to complain about the senior brother, accusing the senior brother for insulting him, the younger brother.
  
  When the father calls the senior brother, the accused one, what is the father going to ask him?
  
  The father is going to say that;
  
  'Your younger brother said you insulted him. Is it true? What did you tell him?'
  
  It is from the answer that the senior brother would give the father,that would make the father to determine , whether or not, what the senior brother told the younger constituted an insult.
  
  What is the father going to use to arrive at this determination or conclusion?
  
  'Natural Experience'and 'Wisdom' even if, the father, is an illiterate.
  
  Our Supreme Court Judges were appointed as Supreme Court Justices, not because of their natural wisdom, but rather, because of their knowledge of the Law, both Ghanaian and Foreign.
  
  We therefore expect them to do just that.
  
  We are confused!
  
  Ghanaians do not know whether or not these Judges are doing the correct thing.
  
  How can 'Petrol' and 'Fire' agree?
  
  How can 'Jesus' and 'Satan' become friends.
  
  What friendship is between 'light' and 'Darkness'? Please Excuse me for my language. I know that we are all Ghanaians.
  
  Now what friendship is between NDC and NPP?
  
  How do they sit at the same table and eat the 'political cake'?
  
  How do they discuss this Petition?
  
  Are these Supreme Court Judges buying time? And for what?
  
  I feel what the Supreme Court Judges should do or should have done was to look into the charges in the petition, consider all the available facts and evidences, apply their book knowledge of the Laws and come to a conclusion that would be supported by cogent reasons and facts.
  
  This is their work. This is what we expect them to do.
  
  A famous U.S. attorney, Thomas Paine, once said:
  
  "..A Constitution is not a thing in name only, but in fact.....
  The Constitution of a country is not the act of its government but of the people constituting a government"

  reply
• Kofi Asaase Asa--- Mantukwa 12 years ago

  Another flesh for thought!
  
  When one reconsiders the decision by the Supreme Court that, the two parties should go and agree on the memorandum of issues and come out with it within 7 days,one can equally think that,
  
  Wh ...
  read full comment

  Another flesh for thought!
  
  When one reconsiders the decision by the Supreme Court that, the two parties should go and agree on the memorandum of issues and come out with it within 7 days,one can equally think that,
  
  When the lead counsel to the petitions, Mr. Phillip Addison, moved to file the application which would constitute the memorandum of issues, which should have been the correct procedure, because, his clients are the petitioners,The Supreme Court Judges were taken unawares, they did not have any, and never thought that this could arise,in other words, it seemed they were not prepared with their own memorandum of issues,, so, in-order for them to buy time and get themselves ready with their own one, after re-considering the charges in both petitions, used this defensive tactics;
  
  Applying the same method that Jesus used when the woman prostitute was to be stoned,
  
  Jesus said:
  
  "He who is without sin, should throw a stone at her".
  
  The supreme Court Judges are also saying:
  
  Go home and agree on a common memorandum of issue that would be suitable to God and Satan.
  
  Any relationship? What is the degree of correlation?

  reply
• Seymour Gray, LL.B. (USA) 12 years ago

  The essential elements of legal cases generally are composed of opposing arguments. Nana Akufo-Addo et al's petition consists of propositions that will be argued by the opposing sides and it will be the Supreme Court's task t ...
  read full comment

  The essential elements of legal cases generally are composed of opposing arguments. Nana Akufo-Addo et al's petition consists of propositions that will be argued by the opposing sides and it will be the Supreme Court's task to choose the facts, which, in the Court's opinions are the best supported facts. This will be the process of determining the principles of moral and ideal rightness, which is most in conformity to relevant laws. All of the Court's majority determinations must rest upon factual principles upon which right and wrong are defined and determined by the majority of the judges. The matters questioning the correct, rightness of voting brought forward in Nana Akufo-Addo et al's petition do not differ as matters in opposition and like most matters before a court will finally be determined by the judges of the Court, as they determine all matters brought before them. Yes, matters in legal opposition can be protracted in litigation, but those parties who truly believe in the rightness of their case will not do those things that commmonly do nothing but protract litigation. Any side that seeks to protract litigation is defending a wrong, non-factual, losing and immoral side. N.B: the delaying applications for joinder of 327 respondants by Mahama's side.

  reply
• luck 12 years ago

  what the SC has embanked on is the process of case management.After all, the issues are clear enough and the petitioners have spelt out the issues they want addressed and the respondents have equally spelt out their oppositio ...
  read full comment

  what the SC has embanked on is the process of case management.After all, the issues are clear enough and the petitioners have spelt out the issues they want addressed and the respondents have equally spelt out their opposition to the petitioners claim.When Adison for the npp moved his motion for their application for direction in court, the lawyer for the ndc Mr Kojo also moved for a preliminary objection to the npp motion on grounds of its being strange to the rules of the court.The npp seem to accept the irregularity but claim that the application was aimed at the substance and not the form of the rule of court.On the basis of that the ndc objection was dismissed and hence the direction from the court for the parties to agree on a memorandum of issues within seven days or else the court will address the issues for them.This is the process of case management and the proceedings because of the sensitivity surrounding the case and the potential of destabilization.It is therefore important to bring all the parties each and every step along through this process.I believe however that the sc are clear on the direction the case going and all they are doing is to safe land it.The SC direction is the best approach to the petition and its outcome without a potential conflict.After all the SC is aware that the parties can not come to agreement on the issues but instead of imposing a a memorandum of issues, the court have given them the opportunity to address it themselves first before it is imposed.Once that is done the process will be open for the litigation to start and I hope the SC will be firm and strong without fear or favour after all the patience.

  reply
• luck 12 years ago

  What Mr Kojo was objecting to in his preliminary objection to the motion as alien to the rule of court was the motion by Adison on behalf of the npp for an application for directions in court, as it relates to the matters to ...
  read full comment

  What Mr Kojo was objecting to in his preliminary objection to the motion as alien to the rule of court was the motion by Adison on behalf of the npp for an application for directions in court, as it relates to the matters to be determined when the substantive case finally starts.Adison argued that his motion relates to the substance of the case and not the rules of court.Adison's opposition to the preliminary objection was therefore upheld and the ndc objection was dismissed with the court ordering the parties to come up with a common memorandum issue.

  reply
• Kofi Asaase Asa--- Mantukwa 12 years ago

  What do you mean by imposition?
  
  What about if it does not favor one side which surely, will be the case?
  
  Anyway the harm is already done. The Supreme Court should have carried on the case normally by looking at the stra ...
  read full comment

  What do you mean by imposition?
  
  What about if it does not favor one side which surely, will be the case?
  
  Anyway the harm is already done. The Supreme Court should have carried on the case normally by looking at the straight facts and proceeded.
  
  Before this detour, everybody was prepared to accept any directive from the Supreme Court.
  
  After-all everybody including these judges knew that there would not be any compromise from either side.
  
  Is the memorandum of issues not contained in the complaints embodied in the petition?
  
  These are the questions that the Supreme Court should address and find answers to.

  reply
• Mallam Kankane 12 years ago

  This is the first time Borkor has given an objective and impartial analysis of a case which is of national interest. These are the sort of articles that we need to move forward not his usual.... You know what i meaan eh?

  This is the first time Borkor has given an objective and impartial analysis of a case which is of national interest. These are the sort of articles that we need to move forward not his usual.... You know what i meaan eh?

  reply
• John Dek 12 years ago

  Your anaysis has kept us a bit in the dark. You will notice that some commentators on your artcle have mis-understood the SC directions to mean that the SC wants the patry to attempt a reconciliation before the main case is h ...
  read full comment

  Your anaysis has kept us a bit in the dark. You will notice that some commentators on your artcle have mis-understood the SC directions to mean that the SC wants the patry to attempt a reconciliation before the main case is heared.
  You may have enlightened readers better if you had delved more into what issues the petitioners want determined and those that the respondents want determined. You could then have enlightened us on the extent to which they differ and possible grounds for agreements.
  A goodwork however for setting the debate. It will be in the interest of Ghana to have a compromise on the issues to be determined and I hope your next article will deal with the issues at stake and suggets ways forward

  reply