President Nana Akufo-Addo and Former President John Mahama
The posture of President Akufo-Addo and former President John Mahama towards decisions of the Supreme Court has sparked heated public debate.
Both leaders filed presidential election petitions before the highest court after respectively losing elections (2012 – Nana & 2020 – Mahama) but their ability to concede defeat after the court’s verdict is exposing which of the two is a true democrat.
Now President Akufo-Addo, then candidate of the opposition NPP in the 2013 landmark petition, in a slim majority of 5:4, wholeheartedly accepted the results and subsequently congratulated Mr. Mahama who had won the 2012 election albeit in a controversial fashion after the death of then President John Evans Atta Mills.
However, in spite of losing the case miserably by a unanimous 7:0 after the 2021 petition, Mr. Mahama of the opposition NDC is refusing to accept the verdict of the court.
He was rather attacking the judges after the verdict did not go his way.
2013 Episode
On August 29, 2013, when the nine-member panel presided over by Justice William Atuguba held that Mr. Mahama was validly elected despite the fact that the petitioners were able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that there were irregularities in close to 11,000 out of the then 26,002 polling stations, the candidate, Akufo-Addo, said he was letting it go so that the country would have peace.
Even before the 2013 result were declared, Mr. Mahama and his officials were captured on television sitting at the presidency wearing white and making merry, as if they knew the result from the court before the declaration.
Nana Concession
When the results were declared, the NPP candidate said “I have called President John Dramani Mahama and I have now congratulated him on being elected as the fourth President of the Fourth Republic of our country. The Supreme Court of our nation has spoken and the result of the December 2012 presidential election has been confirmed as having been won by the candidate of the NDC, President Mahama.
“As I said earlier, whilst I disagree with the court’s decision, I accept it. I accept that what the court says brings finality to the election dispute. We shall not be asking for a review of the verdict so we can all move on in the interest of our nation. Everything in my bones, in my upbringing and in what I have done with my life thus far makes it imperative that I accept a decision made by the highest court of the land, however much I dislike or disagree with it.”
He went on to say that “I am saddened by the verdict and I know that many of our supporters are saddened too. However, for the sake and love of our country, we must embark on a path that builds, rather than destroys, to deal with our disappointment.”
Passionate Appeal
Then candidate, Akufo-Addo, had said further that “I appeal to all members and supporters of our party, the NPP in particular, to accept the verdict of the court. Even in our disappointment we can take pride in the way we have conducted ourselves. Even in our disappointment we can take pride that the NPP has again led the way in deepening Ghana’s democracy,” adding, “In other words, we might not have been given the ruling we sought, but thanks to our efforts, we can hopefully look forward to an improved electoral process in our country.”
He had also said “In Ghana’s 56 year history, this is the first time a presidential election petition of this kind has been filed and pursued through the courts. The whole world has watched us in wonder and admiration. Our reaction to this judgment will be watched keenly in Africa and beyond and will set a precedent for generations to follow,” adding, “It is now up to all of us Ghanaians to put the dispute behind us and come together to iron out our differences, ease the tensions among us, and come together to build our country.”
“Today, let us wish our President well and thank the almighty for His mercies to our nation. The battle continues to be that of the Lord’s. God bless Ghana!” he concluded.
Mahama Speech
After the 7:0 defeat on Thursday, March 4, 2021, many anticipated that Mr. Mahama would concede and move on, but he rather used his speech to attack the judges, the court, the Electoral Commission and the Akufo-Addo-led government.
“Earlier today, the Supreme Court of Ghana delivered its verdict on a petition we filed against the declaration made on the evening of December 9, 2020 by the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission of Ghana, Mrs. Jean Mensa, on the Presidential Elections of December 7, 2020.
“My brothers and sisters, I did not take the decision to go to court lightly. In fact, many were those who expressed misgivings about my decision, not because we did not have a strong case, but because of the times we live in,” he said, adding, “I still believe that no matter the circumstances, it was the right thing to do. It is gratifying that the court’s proceedings were broadcast live. Ghanaians followed the hearings diligently. They understood what was happening even if the legal terminologies were not always easy to grasp.
“Even though the petition to the Supreme Court stood in my name, it nonetheless represented the desire of an overwhelming number of Ghanaians, anxious for answers from the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission as the Returning Officer of the December 2020 Presidential Election.
“Ghanaians were hoping to hear her testify and many are still baffled by the refusal of Mrs. Mensa to be held to account by testifying in this case—unfortunately, with the unanimous agreement of the justices of the Supreme Court of Ghana. This vital part of the process to establish the truth and hold Mrs. Mensa accountable was blocked time and again by a protective cordon and firewall that I am sure had confounded many Ghanaians.”
He said “the refusal of the chairperson is in sharp contrast to the readiness with which Dr. Kwadwo Afari Gyan, then Chairman of the Electoral Commission, willingly testified in the 2013 Election Petition filed by then candidate Mr. Akufo-Addo of the NPP.”
Demystifying 2013 & 2021
In the 2013 petition, Dr. Afari Gyan was forced to defend his record because the petitioners through the then NPP running mate, Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, the current Vice President, had been able to prove beyond reasonable doubt through the over 11,000 pink sheets and other exhibits filed that there were widespread irregularities and the burden of proof had shifted on the EC to explain itself.
However, in the 2021 petition, Mr. Mahama filed, he did not attach the necessary documents and could also not discharge the burden of proof but wanted the defendants to strengthen his case for him, a move which was akin to an accuser asking the accused to prove wrongdoing when he had not been able to prove it himself.
Mahama Shortcomings
Despite his own shortcomings, Mr. Mahama said, “Speaking as a Ghanaian, with no legal training, I believe that the refusal of the Electoral Commission Chairperson to testify in this election petition leaves a bad precedent for the future. I disagree with the suggestion of our justices that an election petition is akin to any other civil litigation and therefore an EC Chairperson, whose functions go to the heart of our democracy, can by a legal sleight of hand, avoid accounting for her stewardship in an appropriate forum such as the highest court of the land.
“Our legal team, led by Mr. Tsatsu Tsikata, put together our case in a clear manner, which left no one in doubt about what the issues were,” and said, “But no one who followed the proceedings in the Supreme Court will be surprised with the judgment pronounced some hours ago.”
He then said, “Much as I am aware that we are legally bound by the decision of the Supreme Court, I disagree with the process of trial and ruling of the court.”
‘Partisan’ Judges
He said “I believe that the law should not be an instrument for partisan purposes. I also believe that the rule of law should mean one rule for all. What anchors the rule of law is equality and fairness to all, irrespective of creed, background, or political coloration. Justice, we must remember, is rooted in moral foundations.
“Ghanaians will also remember this 2021 Election Petition for that profound moment when the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission opted to evade public scrutiny. Everything was done in this trial to prevent the commission from accounting to the people in whose name they hold office. Requests for Interrogatories were dismissed. A request to inspect documents in the possession of the commission was turned down. The request for admission of facts was ignored.
“Worse still, she was aided by her counsel and the court to avoid explaining to the good people of Ghana from her own testimony, under oath in a properly constituted court of law, the errors she, herself, admitted to have committed in the declaration of the 2020 Presidential Election results.”
Embarrassing Stain
“This is a clear stab in the heart of transparency and accountability to the sovereign people of Ghana. Whatever the reasons for not allowing Mrs. Mensa to testify or answer any questions, it leaves an embarrassing stain, not only on our justice delivery system but also, on the nation’s electoral system, which has deepened the grave doubts harboured by many Ghanaians about the true outcome of the December 2020 Presidential Election,” he said.
Mr. Mahama said that “the refusal to account to Ghanaians further sets the worrying precedent – and I do really worry about this dangerous precedent – that may allow other heads of state or institutions to adopt an approach of opacity and non-accountability in their work,” adding, “Just because they can rely on unconvincing interpretations of our laws to shield them from scrutiny in future. I hope and pray that time will prove me wrong.”
He said he was denied justice “by the constant unanimous strictures placed on the petitioner in laying out his case.”
He also said the judges misinterpreted Mr. Nketia’s testimony, saying “this case will go into the Ghana Law Reports for the future, and academics and students of law alike will clearly find befuddling the internal contradictions in our jurisprudence.”
Sharp Contrast
In the 2021 Petition which travelled for 57 days, the seven-member panel of the court used more than two hours to deliver its judgment which was read by Chief Justice Anin-Yeboah.
However, the 2013 Petition travelled for eight months and was handled by nine judges led by Justice William Atuguba, but ended up using less than 10 minutes to deliver its judgment which was 5:4 in favour of Mr. Mahama.
The judges then asked the parties to go for their respective “detailed reasons” from the registry of the court.
Even during that close 5:4 verdict, the judges mistakenly mixed up the numbers live on television until it was corrected when their attention were drawn to it after the proceedings.