The Member of Parliament for South Dayi, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamkepor, has taken legal action to challenge the appointment of two new members to the Electoral Commission’s Board, Hajia Salima Ahmed Tijani and Dr. Peter Appiahene.
In his lawsuit, Mr. Dafeamkepor has named the Electoral Commission and the Attorney General of Ghana as defendants and is seeking to have the appointment revoked, as well as an order restraining the two members from acting as part of the Board.
The appointment of the two new members has been met with criticism from the public and civil society organizations who have accused them of being affiliated with the governing New Patriotic Party.
The opposition National Democratic Congress has also written to the Council of State to reconsider its advice to the President on the appointment of the two new board members.
In his lawsuit, Mr. Dafeamkepor is seeking several declarations related to the qualifications and impartiality of members of the Electoral Commission, as well as an order revoking the appointment of the two members and an injunction restraining them from acting as part of the Board.
Mr. Dafeamkepor is seeking the following reliefs;
1. A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of the letter and spirit of Articles 23, 44(1), 45, 46, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, a person is not qualified to be a member of the 3rd Defendant Commission if that person is a known sympathizer, a member or openly affiliates or identifies with a registered political party in Ghana.
2. A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of the letter and spirit of Articles 23, 44(1), 45, 46, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, a person who is a known sympathizer or member or who openly affiliates or identifies with a registered political party will be biased or prejudiced in his constitutional duties as a member of the 3rd Defendant Commission.
3. A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of the letter and spirit of Articles 23, 44(1), 45, 46, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, a person must be neutral, impartial, fair-minded and non-partisan to qualify as a member of the 3rd Defendant Commission.
4. A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of the letter and spirit of Articles 23, 44(1), 45, 46 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the 1st and 2nd Defendants are open sympathizers and affiliates of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and therefore not qualified to be members of the 3rd Defendant Commission.
5. A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of the letter and spirit of Articles 23, 44(1), 45, 46 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the appointment of the 1st and 2nd Defendants by the President of the Republic of Ghana as members of the 3rd Defendant Commission is contrary to the letter and spirit of Articles 23, 44(1), 45, 46 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana and therefore null and void.
6. An order revoking the appointment of the 1st and 2nd Defendants by the President of the Republic of Ghana as members of the 3rd Defendant Commission.
7. An order of interlocutory injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd Defendants from acting as, or holding themselves out as members of the 3rd Defendant Commission pending the determination of the suit.
8. An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd Defendants from acting as, or holding themselves out as members of the 3rd Defendant Commission.
9. Any further Order(s) or direction(s) as this Honourable Court may deem necessary.
Graphic Online
