Zanetor’s case dismissed; Asked to open defence
The Parliamentary Candidate for Klottey Korle, Dr Zanetor Rawlings, Monday suffered a temporary setback in the courtroom when the Accra High Court dismissed her case that sought to throw out a suit that is challenging her eligibility as the National Democratic Congress (NDC) Parliamentary Candidate for the Klottey Korle Constituency in Accra for the 2016 elections.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice Kweku Ackaah Boafo, in dismissing the motion, described it as unmeritorious.
Open defence
The court, therefore, ordered Dr Rawlings to open her defence in the case in which the incumbent Member of Parliament (MP) of the Constituency, Nii Armah Ashitey, and an aspirant in the party’s Parliamentary race, Nii John Coleman, are arguing that Zanetor Rawlings was not a registered voter at the time she contested and won the elections and, therefore, not qualified by the NDC's own rules to have contested.
Issues
The legal team of Dr Rawlings had argued that the High Court was not the appropriate forum because matters of constitutionality concerning who was qualified to be a parliamentary candidate were the mandate of the Supreme Court and not the High Court.
However, the court held a different opinion as it held that it was the appropriate forum for the case because if there was no ambiguity about a constitutional provision, courts below the Supreme Court could deal with the enforcement of the provision.
The court stated that it was clear that Article 94 was not ambiguous; hence there was no need for the case to go to the Supreme Court.
The court was also of the view that if every issue about the constitution had to go to the Supreme Court, it would just pile unnecessary pressure on the highest court of the land while at the same time stalling progress of work at the lower court because parties would have to ask the lower courts to suspend adjudicating their cases until they finished their constitutional interpretation agenda. It was the case of Dr Rawlings that her opponents who dragged her to court did not follow the internal processes of the party, but the court held that when the 1992 Constitution was breached, the constitution was superior to a political party’s internal mechanism.
“If there is a case of the breach of the Constitution, a party’s internal mechanism should not be used to address it. This court is the appropriate forum,” the court asserted.
Dr Rawlings had also been of the view that the plaintiff-defendants did not have the capacity to institute the legal action since they had not shown that their right had been infringed upon.
But the court disagreed and stated that Mr Ashietey and Nii Coleman had contested the election whose outcome they were contesting.
“They have been members of the NDC and they have participated in the elections. Who has more interest than them? They have more interest. The issue raised by the second defendant is untenable,” the judge declared.
The court also found procedural errors in the suit of Dr Rawlings where instead of responding to the claims made by the plaintiffs in the substantive case, her legal team decided to rather file for instant application for dismissal of the suit against her.
Similar case
A similar case brought against Dr Rawlings was dismissed by the High Court on January 15, this year, because the plaintiffs in the case—Mr Joseph Botchway and three others—lacked locus.
The plaintiffs, who are four executives of the NDC in the constituency, had argued that Dr Rawlings was not a registered voter in the constituency and, therefore, did not qualify to have been in the contest.
After court
After the court ruling Monday, the premises of the court were swarmed by scores of supporters of Ms Rawlings, clad in her t-shirt, were rather in a jubilant mood.
Mr Ashitey, on the other hand, was shouting to declare his victory, saying loudly, “We are the winners, we are the winners.”
It took a handful of police officers to drive out the dancing supporters out of the court premises.