NEW PATRIOTIC PARTY vs. THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION AND ANOTHER [1993]DLSC773

Date	1993-09-16
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1993]DLSC773

ABBAN JSC

AMUA-SEKYI JSC

AIKINS JSC

EDWARD WIREDU JSC

AMPIAH JSC

NANA AKUFO-ADDO (WITH HIM PHILIP ADDISON AND ALEX QUAYNOR) FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

A. FORSON ATTORNEY-GENERAL (WITH HIM MRS ADUSA-AMANKWAH CHIEF STATE ATTORNEY AND G K AVAH CHIEF STATE ATTORNEY) FOR THE DEFENDANTS.

[1993]DLSC773
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">NEW PATRIOTIC PARTY<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION AND ANOTHER<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1993-94] 1 GLR 124<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="right" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:right;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">Date: 16
SEPTEMBER 1993<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>NANA AKUFO-ADDO (WITH HIM PHILIP ADDISON AND ALEX QUAYNOR) FOR THE
PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

A. FORSON, ATTORNEY-GENERAL (WITH HIM MRS ADUSA-AMANKWAH, CHIEF
STATE ATTORNEY AND G K AVAH, CHIEF STATE ATTORNEY) FOR THE DEFENDANTS. <o:p></o:p>

ABBAN, AMUA-SEKYI, AIKINS, EDWARD WIREDU AND AMPIAH JJSC<o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGMENT OF ABBAN JSC.<o:p></o:p>The plaintiff is a registered political party. The first
defendant, the Electoral Commission, by virtue of the Electoral Commission Act,
1993 (Act 451), has been charged with the responsibility of conducting and
supervising all public elections and referenda in the country. The second
defendant—the Attorney-General—was sued as the legal representative of the
Government of Ghana. In its statement the plaintiff pleaded, inter alia, that
the first defendant, acting through its executive secretary, on 14 August 1993
issued written directives to all the district assemblies in the country urging
them to hold elections in order to elect the district chief executive for each
district assembly in accordance with article 243 of the Constitution, 1992; and
that the elections should take place between 18 and 30 August 1993. The defendants
averred in paragraph (1) of their amended defence that the facts so far stated
above were correct.<o:p></o:p>It may be recalled that the present district assemblies were
established by the Local Government Law, 1988 (PNDCL 207) (as amended).
Elections were held under that Law to elect assemblymen to all the district
assemblies. By section 3(3) of PNDCL 207, elections to the district assemblies
were to be held every three years. But this section was later amended by the
Local Government (Amendment) (No 3) Law, 1992 (PNDCL 272) which extended the
three years to four years. That is, the amendment provided that elections to a
“District Assembly shall be held once every four years.”<o:p></o:p>There was a further amendment made on 4 January 1993. This was by
the Local Government (Amendment) Law, 1993 (PNDCL 306). We will here quote the
full text of the amendment: “District Assemblies in existence on the coming
into force of this Law shall continue in existence until such time as new
Assembly members are elected.” In other words, those who were members of the
district assemblies at the time the Constitution, 1992 came into force on 7
January 1993 were to continue to serve as assemblymen pending the election of
new assemblymen. Thus the present assemblymen derive their right to be members
of the district assemblies from PNDCL 306.<o:p></o:p>In paragraphs (6) and (7) of the statement of the plaintiff’s
case, the plaintiff summed up the basis upon which it sought the reliefs. They
read:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“(6) The plaintiff contends that the assemblies provided for by
article 242 of the Constitution, 1992 are different entities in their
character, composition and term from those established pursuant to the Local
Government Law, 1988 (PNDCL 207). <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(7) The plaintiff further contends that the elections of the
district chief executives pursuant to article 243 of the Constitution, 1992
shall be made only by the assemblies provided for by article 242 thereof.”<o:p></o:p>The defendants, in their amended statement of defence, denied
paragraphs (5), (6) and (7) of the statement of case and averred that PNDCL 272
did not offend any statutory provisions and that:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“although the district assemblies as presently constituted were
not established under the Constitution, 1992 of the Fourth Republic, yet
certain provisions of the said Constitution saved the district assemblies as
presently constituted.”<o:p></o:p>The pivot of the defence could be found in paragraphs (4), (5) and
(6) of the amended defence which read:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“(4) In answer to the said paragraphs, the defendants contend that
the combined effect of the Local Government (Amendment) Law, 1993 (PNDCL 306),
article 11(4) of the Constitution, 1992 and section 31(2) of the transitional
provisions of the Constitution, 1992 is to make the assemblies in </main>