Order state to fund political party electoral processes- NDC tells Supreme Court

The National Democratic Congress has asked the Supreme Court to order the State to fund the cost of supervising internal electoral processes of political parties for the election of presidential and parliamentary candidates.

The prayer forms part of the NDC’s Statement of Case filed before the Supreme Court in a constitutional action challenging the legality of delegate-based electoral college systems used by political parties to select candidates for national elections.

In the court document signed by Seth Nyaaba Esq. of Ayine and Partners, the NDC, which is the 2nd Defendant in the suit, urged the apex court to grant the Plaintiffs’ reliefs and hold that the electoral college system established under Articles 43 and 44 of the NDC Constitution is inconsistent with Article 55(5) of the 1992 Constitution.

The Plaintiffs, Prof. Kwabena Frimpong Boateng, Dr. Nyaho Nyaho-Tamakloe and Dr. Christine Amoako-Nuamah, are challenging the internal electoral arrangements of the New Patriotic Party, the National Democratic Congress and the Convention People’s Party.

They argue that systems which limit voting in presidential and parliamentary candidate elections to executives, office holders and selected delegates unlawfully exclude members in good standing from meaningful participation.

According to the NDC, Article 55(5) of the Constitution requires political parties to organise their internal affairs in conformity with democratic principles. The party said the use of a limited electoral college to select presidential and parliamentary candidates does not accord with the letter and spirit of that constitutional requirement.

“We entirely agree with the Plaintiffs that the electoral college system adopted by the 2nd Defendant in its Constitution which limits voting rights to a selected group of individuals to elect presidential and parliamentary candidates contravenes the letter and spirit of Article 55(5) of the 1992 Constitution,” the NDC stated.

The party further submitted that universal adult suffrage and equal voting are cornerstones of Ghana’s democratic framework, and that political parties, being central to democratic governance, must not organise their candidate selection processes in a way that undermines those principles.

The NDC also drew the court’s attention to the Government’s acceptance of a Constitution Review Committee recommendation that internal party democracy should be deepened by expanding the right to elect party executives and candidates to all party members in good standing.

It argued that this position amounts to an implied admission that the current electoral college system does not sit well with Article 55 of the Constitution.

The party, however, urged the Supreme Court not to invalidate past decisions taken under Articles 43 and 44 of its Constitution. It said nullifying previous actions could have a “seismic resultant effect” not only on the NDC but also on the governance of the country.

The NDC relied on decisions such as Margaret Banful v Attorney-General and Justice Dery v Tiger Eye PI to argue that not every constitutional breach must necessarily result in nullity. It said the court must consider the nature of the constitutional provision, the legal consequences of the breach and public policy considerations.

The party therefore wants the Supreme Court, if it grants the Plaintiffs’ claims, to preserve previous actions taken under the impugned provisions while making consequential orders to align future internal elections with Article 55(5).

Significantly, the NDC is also asking the court to order the State to bear the cost of supervising electoral processes within political parties for the purpose of electing presidential and parliamentary candidates.

“Save that we pray that the Plaintiffs’ reliefs are granted, we submit that all previous actions taken by the 2nd Defendant on the strength of Articles 43 and 44 of the Constitution of the 2nd Defendant should remain unscathed. We also pray the Honourable Court to exercise its powers under Article 2(2) to order the State to fund the cost associated with the supervision of the electoral processes in the various political parties for the purposes of electing presidential and parliamentary candidates,” the NDC stated.

The party maintained that the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to intervene in the internal affairs of a political party where the processes used to elect or select presidential and parliamentary candidates are alleged to be inconsistent with the Constitution.

It cited authorities including Mensima v Attorney-General, Martin Alamisi Amidu v President Kufuor and the Attorney-General, and Justice Abdulai v Attorney-General to support its position that Ghana operates under constitutional supremacy and that no institution is above constitutional scrutiny.

The NDC said while courts in other jurisdictions have often been reluctant to interfere in the internal affairs of political parties, Ghana’s constitutional architecture allows the Supreme Court to examine whether the conduct of political parties complies with the 1992 Constitution.

The case is before the Supreme Court under its original jurisdiction.