The decision by the Electoral Commission (EC) to schedule the Kpandai parliamentary rerun for Tuesday, December 30, 2025, has drawn immediate and fierce condemnation from constitutional lawyer Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare.
Prof. Asare argues that the rush to hold the election before the Court of Appeal has ruled on the pending appeal against the Tamale High Court’s judgment is legally unsound, constitutes a substitution of impatience for the constitutional sequence, and risks manufacturing an “avoidable chaos” that could leave Ghana with competing legislative mandates.
“This is avoidable chaos – and precisely what Article 99 is designed to prevent. A parliamentary seat becomes vacant only after the full judicial process has run its course. The Clerk and the EC must respect this safeguard, not override it”
Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare, Private Legal Practitioner
The EC’s action follows the directive of the Tamale High Court on November 24, 2025, and a subsequent formal notification from the Clerk of Parliament declaring the seat vacant on December 9, 2025.
However Prof. Asare insisted that the EC and the Clerk have acted prematurely, violating the constitutional safeguard designed to protect the integrity of parliamentary representation.
Prof. Asare emphasized that pushing ahead with the by-election before the appellate court has spoken “does not uphold democracy; it pre-empts it.” The lawyer stressed that the High Court’s ruling, which is currently subject to appeal, is provisional, not final, and therefore does not satisfy the constitutional requirement for declaring a seat vacant.
He argued that the law is explicitly clear, insisting that for the High Court, the Clerk of Parliament, or the EC to act as though a non-final judgment is final is a serious institutional shortcut.
Danger of Competing Mandates
To illustrate the severe constitutional disorder this expedited timeline invites, Prof. Asare laid out a potential scenario of institutional disaster. The EC has set the rerun for December 30, 2025.
“Imagine that the poll is held and a new candidate emerges victorious. Now imagine that, just four days later, on 3rd January 2026, the Court of Appeal reverses the High Court and affirms that the incumbent was validly elected. What would we be left with? Two competing mandates”
Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare, Private Legal Practitioner
Under this scenario, the nation would be left with a Parliament unsure whom to seat: the MP elected in 2024 whose seat was never truly vacant, or the MP elected in 2025 in a by-election that should never have happened. The result would be a Constitution “bent out of shape for no good reason,” and an unnecessary burden of litigation.
Prof. Asare refuted any claim that the move to declare the Kpandai seat vacant follows the precedent set by the Assin North by-election involving Hon. Gyakye Quayson, clarifying that the latter followed a Supreme Court order, not a High Court ruling that was still under appeal.
He noted that the true cure for concerns about judicial processes taking too long is procedural reform, not institutional short-cuts.
The constitutional lawyer firmly questioned the justification for the rush, noting that the cost of waiting for the Court of Appeal to speak is minimal, perhaps only a difference of a few weeks. Conversely, the cost of acting prematurely is national confusion, eroded legitimacy, and constitutional disorder.
“When the law has already designed a safe, orderly pathway, rushing to cut corners is not efficiency – it is recklessness,” he warned.
Prof. Asare concluded by urging Ghana’s institutions to resist the temptation to “do corner fast” at the expense of the Constitution.
He insisted that the Court of Appeal must be allowed to speak before the people are asked to vote again, emphasizing that the nation deserves order, not expediency.
READ ALSO: Ghana’s 2026 Tariff Hike Renews Push for Nuclear Power
