ROJO METTLE NUNOO, SQUADRON LEADER (RTD) CLEND SOWU & KOFI PORTUPHY vs. THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION [2008]DLSC2462

ROJO METTLE NUNOO, SQUADRON LEADER (RTD) CLEND SOWU & KOFI PORTUPHY vs. THE ELEC... [2008]DLSC2462

Date	2008-07-31
Suit No.	SUIT NO. JS/6/2006
Citation No.	[2008]DLSC2462

AKUFFO (PRESIDING) JSC

BROBBEY JSC

DATE-BAH JSC

ANSAH JSC

ADINYIRA JSC

MR. JAMES QUARSHIE-IDUN WITH MR. EDMOND ARMAH FOR THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION.

HON. JOE GHARTEY FOR THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL WITH EVELYN KEELSON

MARIAN ATUOBI AND CECILIA AGBENYEGAH FOR THE REPUBLIC.

TONY LITHUR FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

[2008]DLSC2462
																																						<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" >ROJO METTLE NUNOO, SQUADRON LEADER (RTD) CLEND SOWU &amp;
KOFI PORTUPHY<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME
COURT]<o:p></o:p>SUIT
NO. JS/6/2006<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">

DATE: 31ST JULY 2008.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>MR.
JAMES QUARSHIE-IDUN WITH MR. EDMOND ARMAH FOR THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION.<o:p></o:p>HON.
JOE GHARTEY FOR THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL WITH EVELYN KEELSON, MARIAN ATUOBI AND
CECILIA AGBENYEGAH FOR THE REPUBLIC.<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">

TONY
LITHUR FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <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">

AKUFFO
(PRESIDING) JSC, BROBBEY JSC, DATE-BAH&nbsp; JSC,
ANSAH JSC, ADINYIRA JSC<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>DR.
DATE-BAH&nbsp; JSC: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;By an order of 18th June 2007, His
Lordship Ofoe J., as he then was,&nbsp;
referred the following for interpretation by the Supreme Court:<o:p></o:p>i.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
“Whether or not upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 63(1)
(sic) of the Constitution the defendant fully discharged the constitutional
duty with the publication of the declaration of President Elect Instrument,
2004.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;ii.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Whether or not upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 64(1) of
the 1992 Constitution any citizen who was aggrieved by or dissatisfied with the
declaration contained in the declaration of the President Elect Instrument,
2004, had 21 days within which to present a Petition to the Supreme Court in
challenge of the declaration, and<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>iii.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Whether or not upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 64(1) of
the 1992 Constitution, the plaintiffs are estopped from attempting now to
challenged (sic) the validity of the President Election.”<o:p></o:p>Statements
of Case were filed by the plaintiffs and the defendant on these issues. The
Attorney-General also, pursuant to an order of this Court, filed a statement of
case.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiffs’ case is basically that the promulgation by the defendant of the
Constitutional Instrument entitled “Declaration of President Elect Instrument,
2004,” CI 49, dated December 10, 2004 was insufficient to discharge the
defendant’s constitutional obligation under Article 63(9) of the
Constitution.&nbsp; Article 63(9) provides
that:<o:p></o:p>“An instrument which – <o:p></o:p>(a)&nbsp;
is executed under the hand of the Chairman of the Electoral Commission
and under the seal of the Commission; and<o:p></o:p>(b)&nbsp;
states that the person named in the instrument was declared elected as
the President of Ghana at the election of the President, shall be prima facie
evidence that the person named was so elected.”<o:p></o:p>The
Plaintiffs allege in their Statement of Case that they wrote to the defendant’s
chairman in October 2005 to publish in the Ghana Gazette the full results of
the December 2004 Presidential Elections.&nbsp;
The Defendant replied that by the publication in the Ghana Gazette of
the DECLARATION OF PRESIDENT ELECT INSTRUMENT, 2004, C.I.49, it had discharged
its constitutional duties with regard to the declaration of the results of a
Presidential Election.&nbsp; Not satisfied
with this response, the Plaintiffs issued a Writ of Summons against the
Defendant claiming the following reliefs:<o:p></o:p>i.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
“A declaration that the Defendant is bound by law to publish in the
Ghana gazette or in any manner permitted by law, the full, final and complete
results of the Presidential Elections of December 7, 2004, including but not
limited to, the details of the total votes cast in each constituency, the total
valid votes cast, the total votes cast for each presidential candidate, the
respective percentage votes, all gauged against the number of registered voters
in the said constituency;<o:p></o:p>ii.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
A further declaration that the failure, refusal or neglect of the
Defendant to so publish the Presidential Elections of December 2004 is contrary
to Article 45 of the Constitution 1992, section 2 of Act 451, the provisions of
CI 15 and the Presidential Elections (Amendment) Act 1996 and therefore
unlawful;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>iii.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
A further declaration that the Declaration of President Elect
Instrument, 2004 to the extent that it was not supported by the full, final and
complete results of the Presidential Elections of December 7, 2004 could not
form the basis of the exercise of any right envisaged under the Constitution,
1992 in respect of, arising from or pursuant to the said declaration;<o:p></o:p>iv.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
An order compelling the Defendant to publish the full and complete
results of the Presidential Elections of December 7, 2004 in the Ghana Gazette
or by any method permitted by law, and in the manner stated above or in
previous Presidential Elections;<o:p></o:p>v.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
A further order compelling the Defendant to furnish the Plaintiffs
forthwith the d</main>