The National Democratic Congress (NDC) has filed an application to stay the High Court’s ruling concerning the re-collation of parliamentary results for Nsawam Adoagyiri, Okaikwei Central, and seven other disputed constituencies.
On December 20, the High Court ordered the Electoral Commission (EC) to re-collate and announce the results for the Ablekuma North and Nsawam Adoagyiri constituencies, effectively nullifying earlier declarations.
This ruling followed a judicial review filed by six New Patriotic Party (NPP) parliamentary candidates, who sought a mandamus order compelling the EC to re-collate and declare the results.
They also requested the Inspector General of Police (IGP) to provide adequate security at collation centres to ensure the EC could carry out its constitutional duties without interference.
The NPP candidates contested results in constituencies including Tema Central, Nsawam Adoagyiri, Okaikwei Central, Techiman South, Ablekuma North, and Ahafo Ano North, citing irregularities in the collation process and subsequent declarations.
The NDC attempted to join the case by filing a motion for joinder, but the Court dismissed their motion, ruling that the party lacked sufficient grounds for inclusion.
In response, the NDC has filed an application at the Supreme Court seeking to overturn the High Court’s decision and restrain the EC from proceeding with the re-collation.
The application, signed by Godwin Kudzo Tamekloe Esq., stated:
“The Court take notice that Godwin Kudzo Tamekloe Esq., Counsel for the Applicant herein, will move this Honourable Court for an order of stay of execution OR suspension of the orders of the High Court (General Jurisdiction 13), Accra, Coram Reverend Joseph Adu-Owusu Agyemang J, dated 20 December 2024, pending the hearing of the Applicants’ application invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of the Honourable Court upon the grounds stated in the accompanying affidavit and for any further order(s) as the Honourable Court may deem fit.”
The NDC contended that the High Court erred by not exercising its powers under Order 55 Rule 5 (2) of C.I. 47.
“The High Court committed a non-jurisdictional error of law by failing to exercise its powers under Order 55 Rule 5(2) of C.I. 47 to direct the 2nd to 6th interested parties to serve the mandamus applications on the Applicants who have interests in the subject of dispute: An error of law apparent on the face of the record which occasioned a substantial miscarriage of justice.”
