CJ to launch election disputes manual

The third edition of the Manual on Election Adjudication in Ghana will be launched by the Chief Justice, Mrs Georgina Theodora Wood, in Accra on Wednesday, November 16.

The 512-page manual, a copy of which is available to the Daily Graphic, gives clear guidelines to judges and lawyers on the processes to follow for the speedy adjudication of electoral disputes.

The manual has since 2008 been developed to handle the normal and healthy cases of some contenders in elections who resort to the courts after losing those elections.

The speedy and effective adjudication of such electoral disputes enhances the tenets of democracy and the rule of law and the Chief Justice, in November 2008, wrote her first foreword to the Manual on Election Adjudication in Ghana and assured Ghanaians that “the Judiciary is well positioned and equipped to deal competently, expeditiously and efficiently with all election disputes within reasonable time lines”.

It is against the background of this promise to lead the Judiciary to speedily and effectively adjudicate electoral disputes, that she would launch the third edition of the manual.

The second edition was published in July 2012.

The Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs Marietta Brew Appiah-Opong, is expected to give some brief remarks at the event, while a former Director of the Ghana School of Law, Dr S. Y. Bimpong-Buta, will walk the audience through the manual.

Chapters

There are 12 chapters in the manual, with Chapter One being the Introduction.

The Hierarchy of the Courts of Ghana, namely, the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, the High Court, the Circuit Court, the Juvenile, District and Family Tribunals, and their mandates, with respect to electoral disputes, have been amply captured in Chapter Two.

The manual is emphatic in stating that the Supreme Court has no appellate jurisdiction in parliamentary election disputes.

It stresses that it is only the Court of Appeal which has appellate jurisdiction in parliamentary election results.

Chapter Two further notes that the High Court has original jurisdiction in  parliamentary election disputes, as well as original and appellate jurisdiction in dealing with electoral offences.

Although the Regional Tribunal shares similar powers with the High Court, it has no original or appellate jurisdiction in election disputes. 

The Regional Tribunal, however, has jurisdiction in electoral offences.

According to the manual, the Circuit Court has no jurisdiction in election disputes of any kind but has jurisdiction in dealing with electoral offences, while the Juvenile Court has criminal jurisdiction over juveniles in electoral offences.

On the other hand, the District Court does not have civil jurisdiction of any kind in electoral disputes but has jurisdiction in handling electoral offences.

The Family Tribunal has neither civil nor criminal jurisdiction of any kind in electoral disputes or offences.

It is important to note that criminal appeals that emanate from any of the courts accredited to have jurisdiction can travel all the way to the Supreme Court.

Appeals emanating from the trial of juveniles involved in electoral disputes can travel to the Supreme Court per instructions in the manual.

Right to vote

The citizen’s right under Article 42 of the 1992 Constitution, the use of biometric information, taking practical steps to vote as a voter, meaningful actualisation of the right to vote as conferred under Article 42 of the 1992 Constitution and applying for registration as a voter using existing voter identification card have all been well treated in Chapter Three of the manual.

Electoral offences

Electoral offences such as registration offences, offences committed by electoral officers, impersonation, bribery, undue influence, interfering with electioneering activities, defacement of notices, publication of false statements, obstruction of officers and other offences, as well sanctions for each offences, have been well articulated in Chapter Seven. 

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Besides resorting to the court for dispute resolution, Chapter Eight of the manual touches on alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms in resolving electoral disputes.

Although ADR mechanisms are not provided in the 1992 Constitution, the Supreme Court Rules, 1996 (C.I. 16); the High Court (Civil Procedure Rules), 2004 (C.I. 47); Section 72 (1) of the Courts Act, 1993 (Act 459) provide that “a court with civil jurisdiction and its officers shall promote reconciliation, encourage and facilitate settlement of disputes in an amicable manner between and among persons over whom the court has jurisdiction”.