2004
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Facing widespread controversy about the Electoral Commission of Ghana’s decision to feature thirty newly created constituencies in the December 2004 presidential and parliamentary elections, the Supreme Court, per Chief Justice G.K. Acquah, invoked its constitutional interpretive authority to resolve when the new constituencies should become operational. Although the plaintiff’s process suffered procedural deficiencies—no verifying affidavit and nonjoinder of the EC and NDC—the Court, given the intense public interest, heard the merits and invited all registered political parties and the EC to file statements. The EC explained that C.I. 46 had been laid before Parliament to increase constituencies from 200 to 230 and revoke L.I. 1538. Applying a two-stage framework, the Court held that once C.I. 46 becomes law under article 11(7), article 47(6) mandates the alterations take effect upon the next dissolution of Parliament, and article 112(4) requires elections within thirty days before that dissolution. The Court rejected proposals for January 2005 by-elections or deferral to 2008 and declared the EC’s inclusion valid, refused an injunction, and made no order as to costs.
JUDGMENT
ACQUAH, CJ:
The Plaintiff invokes the original jurisdiction of this court, for:—
"(c) A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 47(1)(5)(6) and 113 of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana 1992. The Electoral Commission has the right to include the newly created constituencies in the 2004, Presidential and Parliamentary Elections contrary to the position being held by the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and other section/sections of the public do contend otherwise and do support the position of the Electoral Commission thereby creating controversy in respect of the articles 47 and 113 of the Constitution, 1992 (sic).
(d) An order of perpetual injunction restraining any group of people, any Political Party that purports to derail the effort of the Electoral Commission to include the thirty (30) newly created constituencies in the 2004 General and Parliamentary Elections to be held in December, 2004."
The Plaintiff's writ was supported by a Statement of Case, and the written submissions of his counsel. There was no affidavit by the plaintiff verifying facts and particulars in his statement of case, as required by Rule 46(2) (a) of C.I. 16. And although the plaintiff's action is pegged on the views of the Electoral Commission (EC) and the NDC, neither the NDC nor the EC are made parties to the action, nor even served with copies of the writ and the supporting papers.
The plaintiff's action undoubtedly stems from the hue and cry by sections of the public in reaction to the EC's decision to feature the proposed 30 new constituencies in the December 2004 Presidential and Parliamentary Elections. There were varied views. Some contended that the newly created constituencies should not feature in the December 2004 General Elections but rather in the 2008 elections. There were still others who held that the election of candidates to represent the 30 newly created constituencies in Parliament should take place on 7th January 2005, when the alteration shall come into effect or soon thereafter.
Now having regard to the intense public controversy generated by the EC's decision, we decided that notwithstanding whatever flaws in the plaintiff's action we would go into the merits of his case. And in order to give opportunity to all registered political parties and the EC to be heard, we directed the EC and all registered political parties to be served with the plaintiff's writ and accompanying papers, and permitted them to f