Electoral Commission to conduct 1st by-election of 8th Parliament at Assin North Constituency
The Electoral Commission (EC) of Ghana is expected in the coming days, to announce modalities and timelines for the 1st by-election of the 8th Parliament of the fourth republic at the Assin North Constituency in the Central Region.
The by-election has been necessitated 7 months after the 8th Parliament was sworn into office following the judgment of the Cape Coast High Court presided over by Justice Kwasi Boakye, today the 28th of July 2021, in the election petition case between Michael Ankomah-Nimfah (Petitioner) and James Gyakye Quayson (1st Respondent) & the Electoral Commission of Ghana (2nd Respondent)
On 30 December 2020, Michael Ankomah-Nimfah, filed a parliamentary election petition at the Cape Coast high court challenging James E. Quayson’s eligibility to be a Member of Parliament, contending that at the time he filed his nomination to contest the Parliamentary elections between the 5th and 9th of October 2020, when the EC opened nominations, he held Canadian citizenship in addition to his Ghanaian citizenship, in violation of Article 94 [2] [a] of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana 1992, Section 9[2] [a] of Representation of the People Act 1992 [PNDCL 284] as Amended, as well as Public Elections Regulations, 2020 [C.I. 127].
The deposed Member of Parliament James E. Quayson in the 7th December elections which has now been nullified polled 17,498 votes against 14,793 by the New Patriotic Party’s Abena Durowaa Mensah, his closest challenger.
Reliefs Sought by Petitioner
The Petitioner, Michael Ankomah Nimfah, in his petition essentially prayed the Court for seven reliefs against the Respondents (James Gyakye Quayson, 1st Respondent) and the (Electoral Commission, (EC) 2nd Respondent. The reliefs are;
1. A declaration that the filing of Parliamentary nomination forms by 1st Respondent when he held a Canadian Citizenship at the time of filing the said nomination form between 5th – 9th October, 2020, violates Article 94 [2] [a] of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana 1992, Section 9[2] [a] of Representation of the People Act 1992 [PNDCL 284] as Amended, as well as Public Elections Regulations, 2020 [C.I. 127] and same is illegal, void and of no effect whatsoever.
2. A declaration that the decision of the 2 Respondent to clear the 1st Respondent to contest Parliamentary Elections in the Assin North Constituency when the 1st Respondent was not qualified as a candidate on account of his holding dual nationality violates Article 94 [2] [a] of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana 1992, Section 9 [2] [a] of the Representation of the people Act 1992 [PNDCL 284] as Amended as well as the Public Elections Regulations, 2020 [C.I. 127] and same is void and of no effect whatsoever.
3. A declaration that the decision by the 2nd Respondent to allow the 1st Respondent to contest Parliamentary Election in the Assin North Constituency when he held a Canadian Citizenship at the time of filing his nomination form, violates Article 94 [2] [a] of the Constitution 1992, the Representation of People Act 1992, [PNDCL 284] as Amended, as well as Public Elections Regulations, 2020 [C.I. 127] and same is void and of no effect whatsoever.
4. A declaration that 1st Respondent’s election as Member of Parliament for the Assin North Constituency is null and void and of no effect whatsoever as same violates Article 94 [2] [a] of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana 1992, Section 9 [2] [a] of the Representation of the People Act 1992, [PNDCL 284], as Amended, as well as the Public Elections Regulations, 2020 [C.I. 127] being laws regulating Parliamentary Elections in Ghana.
5. A declaration that 13 Respondent at the time of the Parliamentary Elections in the Assin North Constituency was not qualified to contest as a candidate for the Assin North Constituency in accordance with the electoral laws for the time being in force in Ghana.
6. An order of the Court cancelling the Parliamentary Elections in the Assin North Constituency and further orders directed at 2nd Respondent to conduct fresh Elections in the Assin North Constituency.
7. An order of Perpetual injunction restraining 1st Respondent from holding himself out as Member of Parliament-Elect for the Assin North Constituency or presenting himself to be Sworn in as a Member of Parliament”.
Contention of Toppled Assin North MP
On the other hand, 1st Respondent (James Gyakye Quayson) filed his answer to the Petition on 21st January 2021 and amended same with leave of Court on 30h March 2021. In his amended answer to the Petition, he contends that the Petition lacks any legal basis, it is incompetent and lacks any factual basis.
He argues that it is only intended to undermine the sovereign will of the people of the Assin North Constituency who validly voted for him. According to him, the Petition ought to be dismissed.
Further, he says that at the time 2nd Respondent opened nominations and he filed his nomination forms, he was not disqualified from standing for elections by any law in force in Ghana.
He contends that owing allegiance to another country other than Ghana within the meaning of article 94 [2] [a] of the 1992 Constitution does not and cannot mean that the person is necessarily a dual citizen as the Petitioner seems to suggest and that if the framers of the 1992 Constitution intended that to be the case, they would have expressly stated so in article 94 [2] a.
Therefore, to him, within the intendment of article 94 [2] [a] of the 1992 Constitution, he is only required not to owe allegiance to any other country other than Ghana which he did by disavowing his allegiance to Canada in 2019 prior to the commencement of the nomination processes.
Consequently, he says that at the time of filing his nomination forms to contest the Parliamentary Elections for the Assin North Constituency, he did not hold both Canadian and Ghanaian Citizenship. This is because, according to him, in December 2019, he had renounced his Canadian Citizenship by filing an application to that effect subject to the issuance of the Certificate of Renunciation which constitutes an administrative act and serves as evidence of the fact of renunciation.
Therefore, neither the 1992 Constitution, PNDCL 284, as amended, nor Act 451 which the Petitioner heavily relies on and or any other law in Ghana states in what shape or form or manner renunciation of citizenship of another country and or allegiance owed to another country other than Ghana must take or crystalize.
More precisely, he contends that no law in Ghana states that renunciation of citizenship of another country by a Ghanaian or disavowing allegiance owed to another country other than Ghana takes effect only when a Certificate of Renunciation is presented to the person who seeks to renounce the citizenship.
It is his case that prior to the filing of his Parliamentary nomination forms with 2nd Respondent, he met the requirement of article 94 [2] [a] of the 1992 Constitution on the basis that he had renounced his Canadian Citizenship. He was only awaiting for the issuance of the Certificate of Renunciation which only constitutes evidence of renunciation.
Consequently, at the time 2nd Respondent opened the filing of Parliamentary nominations, he was eligible and qualified under the electoral laws of the country to contest as a Member of Parliament. Admittedly, he says that the Certificate of Renunciation was issued to him in November 2020 before the 7 December Parliamentary Elections and that at the time of filing his Parliamentary nomination forms with 2nd Respondent, he had renounced his Canadian Citizenship.
He adds that as an Applicant renouncing his Canadian Citizenship, he has no control over the process of issuance of the Certificate of Renunciation by the Canadian Authorities since that was their primary duty and not his.
Meanwhile, he explains that the delay in the issuance of the Certificate of Renunciation which is an administrative act, was caused by two [2] months lockdown of administrative facilities and that generally, the process of renunciation and the issuance of the Certificate thereof take six [6] to nine [9] months to complete but that was derailed by two [2] months lockdown of administrative facilities world-wide.
Decision of the Court
The Court after establishing that it had jurisdiction to hear and determine the application before it zeroed in on the English translation of Mr James Gyekye Quayson’s Certificate of Renunciation of Canadian Citizenship issued in French by the Canadian authorities. The certificate states as follow;
Name : JAMES GYEKYE QUAYSON.
Date of Birth : 09/10/1952.
Place of birth : Ghana
This is to certify that the person named above has formally renounced Canadian citizenship and pursuant to the Citizenship Act will cease to be a citizen on 26/11/2020.
The above information from the Certificate of Renunciation, without more, is completely conclusive. It caused the damage and destroyed 1st Respondent’s case. Indeed, it settles any ambiguity surrounding when the renunciation of 1st Respondent’s Canadian citizenship took effect.
Therefore, 1st Respondent’s arguments that before the 7th December Parliamentary Elections and that at the time of filing his Parliamentary nomination forms with 2nd Respondent, he had renounced his Canadian Citizenship, that as an applicant renouncing his Canadian Citizenship, he has no control over the process of issuance of the Certificate of Renunciation by the Canadian Authorities since that was their primary duty and not his.
The delay in the issuance of the Certificate of Renunciation which is an administrative act, was caused by two [2] months lockdown of administrative facilities and that generally, the process of renunciation and the issuance of the Certificate thereof take six [6] to nine [9] months to complete but that was derailed by two [2] months lockdown of administrative facilities world-wide, with due respect, are preposterous, untenable, unacceptable, baseless and without merit.
Indeed, if the Court is to go by them, it would serve as a dangerous precedent and thereby remain a cancerous tumor in our jurisprudence. Is it his case that like Claudio, the hero in Shakespeare’s ‘Much I Do About Nothing’, ‘he has borne himself beyond the promise of his age’? Accordingly, the Court in its consequential orders granted all the seven (7) reliefs the Petitioner was seeking. The Court thus ruled;
a. The filing of Parliamentary nomination forms by 1st Respondent when he held a Canadian Citizenship at the time of filing the said nomination forms between 5th and 9th October 2020 with 2nd Respondent violates article 94 [2] [a] of the 1992 Constitution, section 9 [21 [a] of PNDCL 284 and C.I. 127.
b. 2nd Respondent’s decision to clear 1st Respondent to contest the Parliamentary Elections in the Assin North Constituency when the latter was not qualified as a candidate on account of his holding allegiance to Canada other than Ghana violates article 92 [2]1 [a] of the 1992 Constitution, section 9 [2] [a] of PNDCL 284, as amended and C.I. 127.
c. The decision by 2nd Respondent to allow 1st Respondent to contest Parliamentary Elections in the Assin North Constituency when he held a Canadian Citizenship at the time of filing his nomination forms violates the electoral laws of Ghana and same is of no legal consequence.
d. 1st Respondent’s election as Member of Parliament for Assin North Constituency in the 2020 Parliamentary Elections organized by 2nd Respondent is null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever as same violates the electoral laws of Ghana.
e. At the time of the Parliamentary Elections in the Assin North Constituency in 2020, 1st Respondent was not qualified to contest as a candidate in accordance with the electoral laws of Ghana.
f. The Court hereby cancels the Parliamentary Elections in the Assin North Constituency organized in December 2020 and further orders 2nd Respondent to conduct fresh Parliamentary Elections in the Assin North Constituency as such.
g.1st Respondent is hereby restrained perpetually from holding himself out as Member of Parliament-Elect for Assin North Constituency and or presenting himself to be sworn in as a Member of Parliament.
Costs Awarded
Justice Kwasi Boakye’s Court awarded cost of thirty thousand Ghana cedis (GHc 30,000.00) against the 1st Respondent (unseated MP for Assin North, James Gyakye Quayson), in favour of the Petitioner and an additional ten thousand Ghana cedis also against the 1st Respondent in favour of the Electoral Commission (2nd Respondent).
Source: asaaseradio
