Accra High Courts Building
Barring any hitches, an Accra High Court (Human Rights Division), will today give its judgement in the case brought before it by five Ghanaians based in the US over the eleven-year delay in the implementation of the Representation of the People (Amendment) Law (Act 699, 2006) (ROPAA).
The applicants, Kofi A. Boateng, Nellie Kemevor, Obed Danquah, Christiana Sillim and Agyenim Boateng, who are all members of the Progressive Alliance Movement (PAM), a New York State incorporated non-profit organization, through their lawyer, contended that the absence of a law that allows Ghanaians in other countries to vote is a breach of their fundamental human rights.
They averred that it is discriminatory to allow only Ghanaians studying abroad and staff of Ghana’s Missions and Embassies abroad to be registered and vote.
The five are citizens of Ghana by birth, dual citizenship or both.
The case was originally filed in 2016, but was later withdrawn ahead of the 2016 general elections and filled again after the December polls.
Lawyer for the applicants, Samson Lardy Anyenini, prayed the court for an order which would allow them to be registered as voters while resident abroad and being outside the jurisdiction of the Republic of Ghana, and doing so from/at their places of residence abroad or designated centres close to their places of residence abroad or from or at the Ghana Mission and Embassy within their jurisdiction abroad.”
They further prayed the court to allow them “to be issued voters Identity Cards to enable them to vote in public elections and referenda while resident abroad and being outside the jurisdiction of the Republic of Ghana at the time of such elections, and doing so from/at their places of residence abroad or designated centres close to their places of residence abroad or from/at the Ghana Mission/Embassy within their jurisdiction abroad.”
The applicants also want “a declaration that the non-compliance of 1st Respondent (Electoral Commission) in particular to operationalize the Act 699 since same became law on the 24th day of February 2006 is a breach of applicants’ fundamental rights under said various laws and legal instruments.”
Also, the applicants are calling for a “declaration that 2nd Respondent’s (Attorney General) failure, neglect or refusal to uphold, ensure full compliance, operationalization of the Act 699 since same became law on the 24th day of February 2006 is a breach of Applicants’ fundamental rights under said various laws and legal instruments.”
Lawyers for the Electoral Commission, in their affidavit in opposition, argued that the Commission plans to implement the law and should not be compelled to do so.
They said the process through which the applicants invoked the jurisdiction of the court was wrong, insisting that the right to vote is not a human right.
State Attorneys, at the beginning of the case, told the court that they would associate themselves with arguments of lawyers of the EC throughout the entire process.
The court, presided over by Justice Anthony K. Yeboah, is expected to deliver the historic verdict on the implementation of the Act.
By Gibril Abdul Razak