The Electoral Commission (EC) has responded to allegations raised by the presidential candidate of the National Democratic Congress in the 2020 presidential elections, John Dramani Mahama, as contained in his election petition to the Supreme Court.
The former president sued the EC as 1st Respondent and President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo as 2nd Respondent in a case which is expected to commence on Thursday, January 14.
Mr Mahama, in his petition, wants the court to among other things annul the declaration of the results which announced President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo as president of the Republic of Ghana and order a rerun between himself and the 2nd Respondent.
But the EC has dismissed all the allegations contained in the petition and is praying the court to strike out the case.
Here are some of the key arguments raised by the EC:
The EC argued in paragraphs 4, 5, 40 and 42 that the conduct of the December 7 Presidential Election was in accordance with the Fourth Republican Constitution, 1992 and the Public Elections Regulations, 2020 (C.I 127).
According to the EC, C.I 127 provides a four-stage procedure for collating the presidential results, a procedure it says it complied with to the letter.
It denied claims by Mr Mahama that the declaration of the presidential results was in breach of the constitution.
The EC also concedes in paragraph 37 that there may have been some mathematical and computational errors in the collation of the presidential results but argued that “did not have a material effect on the overall results declared.”
It continued in paragraph 39 to say that four constituencies in the Greater Accra Region reported an update on their figures and that resulted in a net difference of 1,651 votes which were factored into the results declared.
With this, the EC insists the difference was negligible to have any material effect on the outcome.
The EC also argued in paragraph 44 that the petitioner failed to indicate the exact number of votes and percentages that he and the other candidates ought to have obtained.
The EC in paragraph 43 argued that the petition be dismissed because the petition does not challenge the validity of the election conducted throughout the 38, 622 polling stations and the 311 special voting centres in the country or contest the lawfulness of the votes obtained by any of the parties in the election, but rather the declaration of the results.
In all the EC deems the petition incompetent which does not merit the attention of the court.