H Kwasi Prempeh

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@Listo_Mens Fakery

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@sulemana Such a ridiculous request or demand, if indeed it was made.

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@PaulinKuranchie As if they haven't awarded themselves enough wealth for their service.

[Bright Simons @BBSimons]

Ghana's ruling party (NPP) went to the High Court to obtain a compulsion order compelling the Electoral Commission (EC) to re-tally results in some constituencies where EC officers had earlier declared in favour of the opposition (NDC).

The EC proceeded to re-tally polling station results in a process called "collation" after which it re-declared the NPP the actual winners of the disputed constituencies, putting paid to the prospect of the NDC securing a two-thirds majority. Such a super-majority would have granted it power to make changes to certain minor parts of the constitution, without needing to court four independent members of Parliament (MPs).

The Supreme Court overturned major parts of the High Court's order this afternoon.

Given that there was, at least, a factual controversy over whether the EC had indeed already declared results in those constituencies, it is hard to understand why the NPP went for a compulsion order ("mandamus") instead of an overturning order ("certiorari") first.

Shouldn't the NPP have asked the court to "quash" the initial EC declarations as illegal or non-conforming? Instead, it asked for an order compelling the EC to tally afresh.

The NPP's approach placed the Court in a position of determining in very summary proceedings that the declarations were essentially a nullity without even going into the merits of whether they were illegal or irrational. And, of course, in similarly summary manner the High Court refused yo hear the NDC's side of the case, on grounds of urgency.

The President of the Supreme Court panel that heard the NDC's case to overturn the High Court's order today once gave a concurrent opinion in the Ernest Thompson case two years ago in which he outlined some of the scenarios in which the High Court can "supervise" or "discipline" bodies like the EC (see attached).

In that case, the natural justice issues that surfaced in this matter (NDC's right to he heard before having to suffer consequences of a judicial or administrative order) were also prominent. More relevant, however, is the discussion of how the High Court's jurisdiction in such matters arise in the first place.

It is not clear whether the choice of strategy in favour of the mandamus/compulsion route, against the option of first overturning the apparent declarations, was to avoid the factual inquiry into what exactly happened during the first collation, or at worst a court-ordered examination of the polling tally documents in dispute.

Whatever the case may be, it would be very interesting to see if the NPP does in fact return to the High Court, before a different Judge, as ordered by the Supreme Court, to still pursue a fresh compulsion order, but this time with the opposition NDC allowed to present evidence that the declarations did indeed happen.

It would seem much neater for the NPP to switch its approach from mandamus to certiorari-plus-mandamus. Except, of course, that would also open the door to a more forensic examination of what exactly happened during the "original/first" collation process. As well as an acknowledgement that such collations indeed happened, even if, in the view of the NDC, they were non-conforming or illegal.

Granted that the Supreme Court is reported to have ordered the fresh High Court hearing to happen by 31st December, is there really enough time to conduct a proper probe of the original collation and declaration processes to determine if there are grounds for judicial review at all? As opposed to the "standard route" of election petition AFTER the declared candidates have been sworn in?

But who are even the "declared candidates" at this point? The EC is on record as saying that it has constitutional powers to correct its own non-conforming conduct and mistakes without a court order. Given how the Supreme Court has weighed in, however, such a position would be hard to sustain before public opinion.

Ghana X/Twitter lawyers, your work has come! 😊

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@barkervogues Or he can designate one Minister to be in charge of 2 or 3 Regions, with a total of no more than, say, 7 or 8 Regional Ministers.

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@Manasseh_Azure Charlatans masquerading as God's prophets. And supposedly serious people, our leaders included, believe in them!

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@BBSimons Curiously, the least taxing part of the EC's job has been made into the most anxiety-inducing and conflict-prone part. Once counting of ballots at polling stations across the country is done, the elections are over. The rest is simple arithmetic, which we all can do independently

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

Collation centers must be eliminated. They are a needless layer that increase tension and risk of error and controversy without adding any value whatsoever to the integrity of the elections. Results must be aggregated directly from polling station data. Simple Excel sheet matter

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@Manasseh_Azure @gyaigyimii Exactly. How do you start chaos when you have no command and control of the security forces? You just play into the hands of those who want to play tricks with the results.

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

I concur. What are Excel spreadsheets for?

https://t.co/7o2KwyCXdt

[jerome @readJerome]

Collation centers have got to go. What on earth is this? You have polling station results, how difficult is arithmetic?

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@KofiEducation The one-day-only-once-every-four-years citizen. How do you build a democracy with such.

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

Vote 🇬🇭
Vote today 🇬🇭
Vote peacefully 🇬🇭
Vote patriotically 🇬🇭
Vote democratically 🇬🇭

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@barkervogues So the things these judges do in this town, were you guys taught to do it like that at the law faculty or Makola? 🤦🏾‍♂️🤷🏾‍♂️🤡

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@Ogya1 There's no "no vote" on the ballot. Not yet. Until then, you can use your vote to reward (approve) or to punish (disapprove). Choose one, and be free. 😃

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@barkervogues Seriously? That just makes no sense. But, then, again, it's Ghana we are talking about. The way law operates here often makes little sense.

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@kobina Every honest person knows this country's politics and governance are long overdue for a reset. Forget the nonsensical politicization of the word. No other way to say it.

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

After 2024, we must enact and implement major reforms to the way we govern and do politics, elections, and campaigns in this country, else our democracy will continue to work only for the benefit of politicians and their loyal partisans. 2028 must be different!

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@kwakuasanteb @KojoTelfer A vote means one of two things: approval (reward) or disapproval (punish). If a vote for A would give A, say, a historic three-term mandate, then it signifies strong approval of A's current performance; hence, a reward for exceptional performance. We can't ignore the reward angle

[H Kwasi Prempeh @HKwasiP]

@edinam_ea 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[Bright Simons @BBSimons]

I have received a lot of requests to say more about the e-gates launched by Ghana's Veep yesterday.

So, here is a very quick summary of the issues:
https://t.co/TVdGAbcqzn

Short version: the whole thing is just a $240 million gig being cooked.