The National Democratic Congress (NDC) has once more requested that the Electoral Commission (EC) and the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP) halt adding Charles Opoku, the alleged candidate for the Assin North constituency, to the voter list.

The NDC noted that the claims made in the aforementioned statements by the Electoral Commission and the New Patriotic Party that the eligibility requirements outlined in Article 94 of the 1992 Constitution regarding qualifications or disqualifications for election of a Member of Parliament are exhaustive were extremely absurd, unreasonable, and unfounded.

“This flawed argument strangely assumes that once you are a Ghanaian of twenty-one years, of a sound mind and hail from a constituency, you are qualified to be elected into Parliament. This position is not only feeble and uninformed, but it also grossly betrays their lack of understanding of the Electoral laws of Ghana.”
NDC

The NDC charged the NPP and the EC with trying to add Opoku, who is not a registered voter in the constituency, to the voter list in a statement released on Sunday. In a response, the NPP refuted the assertion, and the EC denied working together with the NPP to add Opoku’s name to the voter list.

The NDC emphasized in a statement that Opoku’s nomination by the EC and the NPP, who is not a registered voter in the Assin North constituency, is illegal and must be stopped.

“The good people of Assin North deserve to know the truth that the said Charles Opoku who is seeking to represent them in Parliament on the ticket of the NPP, is not a registered voter in the Assin North constituency.
“Under Article 94 of the Constitution, which the EC and the NPP have copiously referenced, one is required to be a registered voter to be eligible to contest as a Member of Parliament. It does not take a legal luminary to understand that the purpose of this constitutional requirement is for a candidate to have a voting right and interest in an election to be eligible to contest and be voted for in that election.”
NDC

The NDC stressed that it is only going by the EC’s own nomination forms and their own C.I 127.

“The NDC is only sticking to the clear provisions of the EC’s own nomination forms and their own C.I 127. Enough of the deception by the NPP and their collaborators in the Electoral Commission,” the NDC asserted in its statement.

Eligibility Critieria Not Enough

The NDC argued that the entirety of Ghana’s election laws did not support the assertion that the eligibility requirements under Article 94 of the Constitution are exhaustive and sufficient to qualify one to be elected a Member of Parliament.

The party cited Article 51 of the same 1992 Constitution, which grants the Electoral Commission the authority to enact constitutional instruments to regulate the holding of public elections. The Public Elections Regulations 2020 (C.I 127) were passed, it was added, in accordance with this power granted to the Electoral Commission.

“It must be emphasized that the above law provides for other requirements that persons desirous to be elected as Members of Parliament must fulfil, which requirements are not covered under Article 94 of the 1992 Constitution. C.I 127, thus provides additional criteria that an individual must fulfil, failing which that individual can be disqualified from being elected a Member of Parliament, even if he satisfies all the requirements of Article 94 of the 1992 Constitution.”
NDC

The opposition party stated that one of such requirements under the Public Elections Regulations 2020 (C.I 127) is the requirement of nomination as set out under regulation 6 of C.I 127. It added that under this regulation, a candidate for election to Parliament must be nominated on a nomination form in “a manner determined by the Commission.”

“Regulation 6(3) of the same C.I 127 provides as follows: The nomination form for each candidate in an election to Parliament shall be (a) witnessed by the signature or mark of two registered voters as proposer and seconder and supported by eighteen other registered voters in the constituency as assenting to the nomination.
“It must be emphasized that even though these additional requirements are not set out under the eligibility criteria provided for under Article 94 of the Constitution, they can form the basis for disqualification despite one fulfilling all the dictates of Article 94. This is clearly set out under regulation 9(2) (3) and (4) of C.I 127.”
NDC