She spent so much time and money to ostensibly alter the image of the Electoral Commission (EC), but just when the big political game it is charged with refereeing is about to be played, Charlotte Osei and her team are found disturbingly wanting.
The image of the Commission in the past few weeks has witnessed a disturbing nosedive, as skeptics about her efficiency turn to each other to exchange ‘we said it oo’ remarks.
Having suffered denigrating attacks from a cross-section of Ghanaians, the events of the period under review have worsened an already battered image, leaving the Commission naked and seeking a piece of cloth to conceal its moral nudity rather hurriedly.
And these occurring at the heels of an expensive and controversial rebranding exercise blended with the stubbornness of Charlotte have dented the credibility of the Commission so much that its ability to hold an election, bereft of propriety questions, remains a poser and therefore anybody’s guess.
Losing crucial court cases and a remark from a Supreme Court judge about how the country would have suffered a crisis had the November 7 polling date been maintained say it all about the wishy-washy state of our EC.
If there is one institution that should be spared the incessant reprimands of the public, it is the EC.
Unfortunately, the contrary is the case, as the rather brief tenure of the Chairman of the Commission has witnessed the greatest number of litigations that have pierced her underbelly menacingly.
We are not yet out of the woods as the string of court cases wait for adjudication.
Should the Commission lose these too, the listing ship could be heading for the waiting rocks.
Martin Amidu’s suggestion about the lady exiting the position is shared by many Ghanaians.
We have observed, however, that Charlotte and her Commission are not in agreement with the High Court judgment and have turned to the Supreme Court for adjudication.
In a democracy however, we cannot begrudge them such a decision.
The strings of controversies underpinning her stewardship speak volumes about her ability to steer the affairs of the Commission out of the choppy waters it finds itself now.
The case for which she is not in agreement concerns the PPP, but with the other aggrieved political parties also in court, we can foresee the Commission suffering more fractures.
In the interest of public morality and policy, political parties should be seen to be above board.
This we do not doubt but when the EC turns its attention from the strict application of the electoral laws at the time it should, we would be hard-pushed not to regard the EC as an entity being selective in its application of the Electoral Laws.
Where are the dead parties invited for the deliberations on the call for the replacement of the voters’ register?
The EC has a problem and this is what is haunting it.
The place of a credible election in a given democracy cannot be marginalized.
Adequate funds are earmarked for the exercise just so no avoidable hiccups stand in the way of credible polls.
Challenging court cases at this time is a face-saving manouvre which would pull the EC deeper into the quagmire.
Like puppetries could someone somewhere be pulling the strings to have the EC act in specific modes? Tempora mutantur. Â We are just thinking.