Nana Yaw Ntim and Anor v. Kingsley Carlos Ahenkorah and Anor
June 10, 2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE NOVISI AFUA ARYENE (MRS.)
Areas of Law
- Constitutional Law
- Human rights Law
- Administrative Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
June 10, 2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The High Court, per H/L Justice Novisi Afua Aryene, dismissed a suit by New Patriotic Party members seeking to nullify Carlos Ahenkorahs selection as the NPPs parliamentary candidate for Tema West. The NPPs NEC had announced affirmative-action guidelines to allow only Ga indigenes to contest coastal Greater Accra seats. After initial disqualification as a non-Ga, Ahenkorah was cleared by the Regional Vetting Appeals Board and the National Appeals Committee, contested the primaries, and won. Plaintiffs argued the Appeals Committee unlawfully varied NECs decision without National Council approval and that Ahenkorah was not a registered voter of Tema West. The court held the Ga-only rule discriminatory and unconstitutional under Articles 12(2) and 17, inconsistent with the NPP Constitution (Article 11(4)), and that only a National Delegates Conference (Article 18) could amend party qualifications. It further held Ahenkorahs vote transfer under CI 75 valid, the prior High Court ruling binding (res judicata), and the Party estopped under Evidence Act s26 from disputing his selection; the action was dismissed without costs.
Plaintiffs and 1st defendant are members of the New Patriotic Party, the 2nd defendant herein(hereinafter referred to as The Party). At a meeting of the Party’s National Executive Committee(NEC) on 23rd of March 2015, an affirmative action was taken to allow only Ga Indigenes to contest parliamentary seats in coastal areas within the Greater Accra Region including the Tema West Constituency.
The rationale was to address complaints of the Ga voters, ensure ethnic balance and make the Party more attractive to Ga voters.
In furtherance of this and other decisions, guidelines were issued for the conduct of the Party’s Parliamentary primaries.
In the Tema West Constituency, the following aspiring candidates were vetted by the Party’s Constituency Vetting Committee: the incumbent Member of Parliament, Hon.
Irene Naa Torshie Addo, 1st defendant and Mrs. Adjoa Amoako.
1st defendant and Mrs. Amoako were disqualified by the vetting committee on grounds of being non-Ga indigenes.
Dissatisfied, 1st defendant appealed to the Party’s Regional Vetting Appeals Board and the decision of the constituencyvetting committee was overturned.
Dissatisfied, plaintiffs herein together with some othersappealed to the National Appeals Committee of the Party who upheld the decision of theRegional Vetting Appeals Board.
Having been cleared by the Party, 1st defendant contested the primaries in the Tema West Constituency and won.
It is plaintiffs’ case that the decision of the National Appeals Committee to permit a non-Ga tocontest the primaries, amounted to a variation of the guidelines given by the NEC and was therefore void.
And that per the Party’s Constitution, the NEC was responsible for directing and overseeing the Party’s operations and activities and in performing its functions, was subject only to the National Council.
Therefore by varying the guidelines without reference to the National Council, both the National Appeals Committee and the General Secretary of the Party flouted the Party’s Constitution.
Plaintiffs averred that consequently, 1st defendant’s purported election bythe Party as its parliamentary candidate for the Tema West constituency is null and void and ofno effect.
Plaintiffs’ case is that it was a requirement in the Party’s Constitution that every contestant of the primaries must be a registered voter in the constituency in which he seeks election.
And that 1stdefendant did not satisfy this requirement.
1st defendant disputed the claims and aver