The supreme court needs wisdom and courage

Read Comments Comments (12)

• Queen 12 years ago

  Well done. God Bless you.

  Well done. God Bless you.

  reply
• william 12 years ago

  I BELIEVE IN PRAYERS. BUT IF YOU ARE FOLLOWING THE COURT CASE THEN YOU WILL SEE THAT THE JUDGES THEMSELVES AND WELL WISHERS HAVE ALREADY PRAYED AND GOD HAS ALREADY ANSWERED!!!

  I BELIEVE IN PRAYERS. BUT IF YOU ARE FOLLOWING THE COURT CASE THEN YOU WILL SEE THAT THE JUDGES THEMSELVES AND WELL WISHERS HAVE ALREADY PRAYED AND GOD HAS ALREADY ANSWERED!!!

  reply
• K.D. 12 years ago

  Ghanaians are Corwads , nothing will happen.

  Ghanaians are Corwads , nothing will happen.

  reply
• K.D. 12 years ago

  Ghanaians are Cowards, nothing will happen.

  Ghanaians are Cowards, nothing will happen.

  reply
• THE AUDITOR 12 years ago

  Sir, it was refreshing to read your opinion piece this morning. Though I do not share in some of your veiled pessimism about possible consequences arising from the pending SC decision, i completely agree with your understa ...
  read full comment

  Sir, it was refreshing to read your opinion piece this morning. Though I do not share in some of your veiled pessimism about possible consequences arising from the pending SC decision, i completely agree with your understanding of the sanctity of the ballot box.
  
  There seems to be nothing hard or concrete about any of the numbers being thrown at the court by either side. What is clear to some of us lay observers is the inherent competition between 'the face of the pink sheet' versus the 'sanctity of the ballot box'. It is only the eventual determination of the case that will determine the way forward.
  
  One area of slight concern that one can contribute to your excellent article has to do with two directives decreed by the SC as the issues to be determined. The question of "whether or not any such violations affected the outcome of the elections" is in my layman's view an almost impossibility to determine given the subjectivity of both sides of the argument so far unveiled before the honorable justices. Both sides have unfortunately focused on subsets of the universe of the polling stations and pink sheets. So, as pointed out by Dr. Afari-Djan, there are certainly multiplicity of statutory violations, omissions and irregularities, way beyond those asserted by the petitioners. He went on to explain that even if a polling station does not open for business by a stipulated time, that amounts to a statutory violation or an irregularity. It appears the accepted norm therefore is WHETHER THE VIOLATIONS AND IRREGULARITIES ARE INJURIOUS TO ONE OF THE PARTIES IN THE CONTEST.
  
  One can only hope that the indiscriminate nature of any violations is subsumed under the second category of issues to be determined in the case, that is, whether the outcome of the elections has been otherwise affected by any such violations.
  
  As you stated, the way the court handles these matters will for years to come determine whether transparent and acceptable elections can be held in Ghana. One cannot also discount the impact of any decision on the Legislative arm of the State going forward. There are simply too many imponderables to factor into any decision by the SC, and to some of us 'clear thinking' is perhaps required if not instead of, then in addition to prayers!!

  reply
• Dr Yaw Ohemeng 12 years ago

  It is very difficult following what the writer really wanted to convey. Maybe he is trying hard not to be in contempt; hence the actual message is lost in suppositions. On the one hand he seems to say that sovereignty should ...
  read full comment

  It is very difficult following what the writer really wanted to convey. Maybe he is trying hard not to be in contempt; hence the actual message is lost in suppositions. On the one hand he seems to say that sovereignty should not be limited by inefficiencies of any group; yet on the other he appears to see technology as having the potential to undermine or limit sovereignty. He does not appear to connect that technology can only undermine sovereignty if it is applied inefficiently by inefficient groups organising an election.
  
  He does not seem to subscribe to the fact that technology, appropriately applied can eliminate bloated registers, multiple registrations, multiple voting and impersonation. He appears to be saying that votes should be considered valid even if the ‘technology agreed by all’ is not resorted to in determining what a valid vote is. This disagreement cannot be back-fitted to the event, if all agreed, a priori, to the mode of ascertaining what a valid vote should be.
  
  Another inference from his writing is that the SC should be resorting to statistics to determine the second question before it. That is true only to the extent of ascertaining that the numbers in question have the potential to affect the results. I do not see his point in arguing for the extrapolation of what might be found in the Petitioners’ evidence to cover the whole by way of determining confidence levels. He probably also believe that doing this may render the Petitioners’ ‘discovery’ inconsequential. This is where I disagree with him on two counts.
  
  First, there is no better statistic than what can be gleaned from examining the whole population, i.e. the entire 26, 002 pink sheets. If the EC was really interested in demonstrating that evidence on the face of the pink sheets, as submitted by the respondents, was inconsequential, it should have voluntarily produced all of them. Had it done that, this case might have been over by now. Had that happened, no one would be entitled to engage in subjectivities.
  
  The second count of my disagreement is that 11, 138 pink sheets out of 26, 002 (42.8% of the population) is very significant and that very reliable statistics can be generated from such a sample. If such a sample shows infractions, believe me, examination of the entire population will produce almost the same result.
  
  Lastly, the writer also appears to argue that somehow, what is on the face of the pink sheet could be different from reality. If that happens to be the case, then really the Petitioners do have a case. If we cannot back-check what took place in an election, by examining records of that election, we are DOOMED as a nation. It means elections can be manipulated and there will be no trail left.

  reply
• THE AUDITOR 12 years ago

  The message to me is clear enough. We can colloborate data on pink sheets after the event and we as a country will not necessarily be doomed. Elections are a process as well as chain of events and distinct steps. One cannot a ...
  read full comment

  The message to me is clear enough. We can colloborate data on pink sheets after the event and we as a country will not necessarily be doomed. Elections are a process as well as chain of events and distinct steps. One cannot audit a pink sheet and regardless how discrepancies came to be apparent on the face of pink sheets, seek to assert that everybody's sacred franchise at a polling station is nullified.
  
  This is where the challenge facing the SC stands. If the errors, irregularities were discovered as anticipated during the process, the validity of such concerns were meant to be investigated 'live' as it were and any revote found necessary ordered. However, in a 'post factum' situation, it is troubling to expect all errors and irregularities tobe fully investigated, and impact on result assessed before election outcomes are confirmed. If Ghana goes that way, clearly we will never be able to declare conclusive election results without Supreme Court intervention in future.
  
  The writer refers to 11,138 polling stations but some 9000 of these relate to double serial numbers and lack of presiding member signatures. The remaining 2000 centers have to do with over voting and lack of finger print verifications. It is my estimate that over half of these 2,000 polling stations have been shown to be genuine errors, some relating to lack of adequate understanding of C3 line on the pink sheet, etc.
  
  In my view there may be only some 1,000 polling stations remaining where violations as evident on the face of the pink sheets may remain readily unexplained. If this is right, then we are talking about less than 1% of the population and statistically insignificant, I make bold to suggest. Even if found to be significant it is only after thorough investigation of these 1,000 or so polling stations can the principle of infestation of whole ballot boxes can be invoked. This is the point at which injury to one party to the election can be ascertained and appropriate remedy devised.
  
  In short, wholesale nullification of sacred franchises guaranteed under the constitution should hopefully cannot derive solely from pink sheet ballot reconciliation irregularities. For sake of posterity, one hopes not!!

  reply
• GREAT NANA ANTWI 12 years ago

  ARE YOU IN NEED OF A FAST POWERFULL SPIRITUALIST?THEN GOOGLE OR GO TO greatnanapowerfullspiritualist blogspot com

  ARE YOU IN NEED OF A FAST POWERFULL SPIRITUALIST?THEN GOOGLE OR GO TO greatnanapowerfullspiritualist blogspot com

  reply
• Sir Paul. 12 years ago

  E.C should be cautioned to do a good job next time.Whatever the outcome Three and half years is not far, we are enjoying some peace.We are peace loving people,let things remain like this.PEACE IS BETTER THAN RICHES

  E.C should be cautioned to do a good job next time.Whatever the outcome Three and half years is not far, we are enjoying some peace.We are peace loving people,let things remain like this.PEACE IS BETTER THAN RICHES

  reply
• Okonko Palm 12 years ago

  This is a very good article.There is no perfect elections anywhere.Even the checks and balances are all subjective as it is a matter of opinion which of the checks and balances are safer since this safeguards differ from coun ...
  read full comment

  This is a very good article.There is no perfect elections anywhere.Even the checks and balances are all subjective as it is a matter of opinion which of the checks and balances are safer since this safeguards differ from country to country.
  
  The accounting for ballots typically involves reconciling the number of ballots found in the ballot box at the end of the election with the number issued to voters during the voting period and the number stocked at the polling place at the beginning of the election.
  
  At the end of the day, all ballots must be accounted for as either voted, spoiled or never issued.
  
  in order to ensure the integrity and transparency of the elections the counting process must as well be transparent.
  
  That is why it is required that all ballot counting be done openly, from the time the ballot box is opened and its contents dumped out for counting until the time the official totals for the precinct are publicly posted.
  
  
  Once these rules are followed any other suggestion like the so called evidence on the face of the pink sheet is nonsense.once the requirement for open election administration had been met by literally inviting the public, to witness the counting in open and transparent way as was done in this elections it will be preposterous to use a back door approach to power.
  
  Suggestions can be made to enhance future elections since no election is perfect.We always learn from our experience but to make clerical errors and trans positional errors look like grounds for annulment of elections is to stretch the imagination too far.
  
  Election are won through the ballot box and that means what is in the ballot box.Any attempt at suggesting otherwise will be disingenuous.No body had won elections on a technicalities as some want to suggest.If it happens it will be a first and I doubt that very much.I repeat elections are won through the ballot box and not on technicalities period.

  reply
• Kwobia ( Toronto ) 12 years ago

  There will be peace because Ghanains are an obedient people.Despite so many coups,Ghanains always eschewed violence.The SC will deliver a decision,and Ghanains will take it in stride.

  There will be peace because Ghanains are an obedient people.Despite so many coups,Ghanains always eschewed violence.The SC will deliver a decision,and Ghanains will take it in stride.

  reply
• Tinga Tales 12 years ago

  Amen....it's well...sir!!!! Thnks for speaking on behalf of all Ghanaians!! Those r our uttermost prayers on and after the verdict.

  Amen....it's well...sir!!!! Thnks for speaking on behalf of all Ghanaians!! Those r our uttermost prayers on and after the verdict.

  reply