Flagbearer of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), John Dramani Mahama, has said that he disagrees with the judgement by Supreme Court on the 2020 Election Petition.
The seven-member panel of the Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed former President John Mahama’s application challenging the 2020 election results. According to the Supreme Court, the suit was “without merit.”
But reacting to the judgement by the Supreme Court, in a media encounter, the former President stated: “Much as I am aware that we are legally bound by the decision of the highest court of the land, the Supreme Court, I disagree with the process of the trial and the ruling of the court”.
John Mahama has, however, assured that its party will do nothing to disrupt the stability of the country but it will continue to be the “voice of the voiceless”.
“We will be law-abiding and we will do nothing to compromise the stability of this country. We will however continue to be the voice of the voiceless and we will not be distracted from our goal of demanding justice and fairness of the people of Ghana at all times”
Background
The Petition was lodged at the apex court by former president John Dramani Mahama, who was the flagbearer of the opposition National Democratic Congress, NDC. Mahama was challenging the EC’s December 9 declaration of Akufo-Addo as president-elect.
Mahama dragged two parties to the top court. They were: the Electoral Commission and President Akufo-Addo as first and second respondents respectively.
The issues
- Whether or not the petition discloses any cause of action – that is if there is any legal grounds for the petition,
- Whether or not the 2nd Respondent [Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo] met the Article 63 (3) threshold of the 1992 Constitution – this constitutional provision states that a presidential candidate must obtain more than 50 per cent of the total valid votes cast to be declared as President-elect,
- Whether or not the 2nd Respondent [Nana Akufo-Addo] still met Article 63(3) of the 1992 threshold by the exclusion or inclusion of the Techiman South constituency presidential election results.
- Whether or not the declaration by the first respondent (EC) on December 9 of the presidential election conducted on December 7 was in violation of Article 63(3) of the 1992 Constitution,
- Whether or not the alleged vote padding and other errors complained of by the petitioner affected the outcome of the presidential election results of 2020.
By: Alberta Dorcas N D Armah
