ABU RAMADAN & EVANS NIMAKO v. THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION & THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
2016
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- WOOD (MRS), CJ (PRESIDING)
- ANIN YEBOAH JSC
- BAFFOE-BONNIE JSC
- GBADEGBE JSC
- BENIN JSC
Areas of Law
- Constitutional Law
- Civil Procedure
2016
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Supreme Court dismissed the applicants' request for new substantive orders but clarified that its original judgment of May 5, 2016, required the immediate removal of names of individuals who registered to vote using NHIS cards. The Court stated that its power to clarify judgments does not allow for substantive changes and emphasized the principle of res judicata, prohibiting new actions based on the same cause already judged. The Court also highlighted that its orders under Article 2(2) of the 1992 Constitution take precedence over other statutory provisions. The clarification ensures that those affected by the deletion order have the opportunity to re-register and participate in the 2016 general elections.
GBADEGBE JSC:
Pending before us is an application by the plaintiffs-judgment creditors-applicants(the applicants) for clarification and further directions in respect of our judgment dated May 05 2016. The application was expressed in the body of the motion paper to have been brought under our inherent jurisdiction and rule 5 of the Supreme Court Rules, CI 16 of 1992.The reliefs prayed for by the applicants numbering four are as follows;
(a) A declaration that the order made by this honourable court pursuant to the judgment in the instant suit dated May 5th, 2016 that the 1stDefendant/Respondent to“delete or clean” the current register of voters to conform to the provisions of the 1992 Constitution and applicable law means the immediate removal of names of persons who registered with the National Health Insurance Scheme Card and who had otherwise not established qualification to register or remain on the register of voters; and
(b) A declaration that the said order is made pursuant to Article 2(2) of the Constitution of Ghana and provides the legal basis and authority for 1st Defendant/Respondent to comply with same forthwith.
(c) A declaration that the dismissal of Plaintiffs/Applicants reliefs 4(a) and (b) in the suit does not bar 1st Defendant/Respondent from adopting the validation process as an auditing tool to clean the current register of voters.
(d) An order further directing the 1st Defendant/Respondent to remove the names of persons who used the National Health Insurance Scheme Card and others who had not lawfully established qualification to register from the current register of voters forthwith and provide those who remain eligible and subsequently establish qualification to register under law an opportunity to do so in time to participate in the general elections of 2016.
The application was supported by an affidavit which provided the factual basis of the motion. The Defendants/Respondents in their answer to the application raised objections to the substantive reliefs claimed by the applicants in the matter. The respondents contend that the applicants having invoked the court’s jurisdiction for the clarification of the judgment of 05 May 2016, the reliefs sought should be limited to the scope and meaning of the orders made under it and that it is incompetent for the applicants to seek substantive declaratory reliefs.
The respondents also take issue with the applicants for pursuing reliefs which were clearly granted in the judgment of th