John Darko, Legal Counsel to the Minority Caucus in Parliament, has described the National Democratic Congress’s (NDC) intention to seek a review of the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Kpandai parliamentary election as unnecessary and impractical.
According to him, securing a review from the apex court is extremely difficult, as the threshold required for such applications is significantly high.
“There is no way the court will even give you the opportunity. And I am not sure they will be able to meet this high threshold. It is important when you are before the Supreme Court, and they have set the rules very clearly in a lot of decision before the Supreme Court. To get the Supreme Court to even admit that it will review its own decision, it is a high threshold, and I don’t think that they can meet that threshold,” he said, urging the party to accept the ruling rather than pursue further legal action.
Mr Darko’s comments follow remarks by the NDC’s Majority Chief Whip, Nelson Rockson Dafeamekpor, who indicated that the party would explore the option of seeking a review of the court’s decision.
Read also: “It is not over” — Dafeamekpor tells NPP after Supreme Court ruling on Kpandai seat
On Wednesday, January 28, the Supreme Court has, by a 4–1 majority, overturned the High Court’s ruling annulling the Kpandai parliamentary election won by the New Patriotic Party (NPP)’s Matthew Nyindam.
Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, who presided over the panel, dissented.
The decision follows an application filed by Mr Nyindam seeking to invoke the Supreme Court’s supervisory jurisdiction to set aside the High Court’s ruling on the grounds of jurisdictional error.
The court upheld his application, effectively restoring his election as Member of Parliament.
The central issue before the Supreme Court was the date on which the Electoral Commission (EC) gazetted the results of the 2024 parliamentary election for the Kpandai constituency.
Under Ghana’s electoral laws, an election petition must be filed within 21 days of the gazette notification of results. A petition filed outside the 21-day period will not give the court jurisdiction to hear the case.
Mr Nyindam’s case was that the EC gazetted the results on 24th December 2024. Therefore, any petition filed outside of the 21-day period counting from this date would be deemed to be incompetent.
About the Author
