FRAMERS OF the 1992 constitution did a yeoman’s job by giving Ghana a set of legal instruments that has kept our democratic governance for the past 30 years and still running.
On the hindsight of these legal luminaries, political activists, academicians, traditional authorities, the clergy, and civil rights activists was the insertion of a “constitutional time bomb” in the 1992 Constitution.
The constitutional time bomb posed a threat in the 2020 presidential and parliamentary elections where members of the main opposition party, National Democratic Congress (NDC) rejected the elections results, staged street protests in violation of peace accord signed by presidential candidates, and caused confusion in the country.
 Party leaders of opposition NDC, their Members of Parliament (MPs) and supporters election protests generated no shortage of outraged commentary in Ghana and the international world that I have denounced what I saw as the “bigotry” of the “Election law” 50% plus one vote, “Our constitutional time bomb?”
Having said that, the time bomb which could go off to destroy Ghana’s beautiful democratic processes is the confusion surrounding the 50% plus one vote’s constitutional mandate that a political party candidate must attain in presidential election in order to be declared a winner in general elections.
The twice defeated presidential candidate of opposition party (NDC) Mr. John Dramani Mahama challenged the certified results of 51.30% votes won by Nana Akufo-Addo and petitioned the Supreme Court (SC) to annul the elections and called for runoff between him (John Mahama) and the winner Nana Akufo-Addo.
What could be determined as the source of the NDC’s after election protests, conflict between its MPs and both Electoral Commission officials, the police and the members of other political parties was the determination of attainable 50% plus one vote for the (EC) to declare a winner which SC subsequently ruled in favour of the President and the EC.
Time and again, arguments that 50% plus one vote is not attainable have been raised by notable and distinguished luminaries who included the late Omanhene of New Juaben, Daasebre Oti Boateng, who called for a total review of that constitutional requirement.
It is, therefore, unfortunate that all have turned deaf ears to the call to amend this requirement only for the “ticking constitutional time bomb” to continue to pose a threat to our fourth republican party democracy in Ghana.
The 50% plus one vote, as put in another context, is the number of overall votes needed by any candidate to win a presidential election in Ghana, and stipulated in Article 63(3) of the Constitution, and it reads, “A person shall not be elected as president of Ghana unless at the presidential election the number of votes cast in his favour is more than 50% of the total number of the valid votes cast at the election.”
The late Daasebre Oti Boateng, in one of his arguments, made it clear that in spite of the clear and unambiguous constitutional provision, the EC introduced an invalid construct, the so-called 50% plus one vote rule as a proxy for the true constitutional provision stated above.
Explaining the invalid construct, the former state statistician, stated among other reasons why the 50% plus one vote is invalid and mentioned as follows:
- a) that the two components of the construct are non-additive since percentages and natural numbers cannot be added unless prior conversion is made from one state to the other,
- b) that once the 50 per cent of the total valid votes cast in an election is obtained, there is no valid vote or votes left anywhere behind to be added to the 50 per cent thereafter, and
- c) that in all cases where the total number of valid votes cast in an election is an odd number, it is impossible for any contesting candidate to obtain exactly 50 per cent of the votes, thus rendering the 50 per cent component part of the construct inoperative and invalid.
Having established the source of the conflict, which is the invalid construct of the 50% plus one vote, it is now understood why Mr. John Mahama petitioned the Supreme Court that the President, Nana Akufo-Addo, did not attain 50% plus one votes to be declared the winner of the last elections, and called for runoff between him and the President.
On countless occasions, Sammy Gyamfi of the communications department of the NDC was heard on radio, as he challenged the EC that per their own collated results the President did not attain more than 50 %, rather he got 49.98%.
Mr. John Mahama did not challenge the electoral figures which were declared by the Electoral Commission as spoiled or rejected ballots that some EC officers deliberately tempered with the ballots that were rejected.
Sadly, it was alleged that Nana Akufo-Addo campaigned extensively on the number one slot on the ballot paper, and electors voted in drones for Nana Akufo-Addo, so the plan was to tear off the first spot, serial numbers and eventually make those ballot papers rejected.
Since the Supreme Court of Ghana has been interpreting constitutional provisions that are not clear, let us seek an amendment for Article 63(3) of 50% plus one vote, which is an invalid construct and posing as a “constitutional time bomb.”
Writer is a freelance broadcast journalist in Toronto – Canada
BY Stephen A. Quaye