Eshun Vrs Electoral Commission and Another [2016] GHASC 81 (27 October 2016)

Eshun Vrs Electoral Commission and Another [2016] GHASC 81 (27 October 2016)

The court held that while the 1st defendant made provisions for transparency and fairness in the conduct of elections, the regulations were inaccurately expressed and incomplete regarding the collation forms and procedures, thus requiring judicial clarification and supplementation to align with constitutional mandates.

Citation
[2016] GHASC 81
Parties
Plaintiff: Kwesi Nyame-Tease Eshun; 1st Defendant: Electoral Commission; 2nd Defendant: Attorney-General
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
27 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Outcome
Declarations granted in part; orders issued to clarify and supplement C.I. 94 to ensure compliance with constitutional requirements.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Constitutional Provisions on Elections, Transparency and Fairness in Electoral Process, Statutory Construction, Administrative Law
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Election Law Interpretation of Constitutional Provisions on Elections Transparency and Fairness in Electoral Process Statutory Construction Administrative Law

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kwesi Nyame-Tease Eshun

Plaintiff

Electoral Commission

1st Defendant

Attorney-General

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the omission to provide for signatures and copies of collation forms in C.I. 94 violates constitutional requirements for free, fair, and transparent elections
  2. 2 Whether the absence of clear steps for presidential results collation is unconstitutional
  3. 3 Whether inaccurate references and omissions in C.I. 94 undermine electoral transparency and legality

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that while the 1st defendant made provisions for transparency and fairness in the conduct of elections, the regulations were inaccurately expressed and incomplete regarding the collation forms and procedures, thus requiring judicial clarification and supplementation to align with constitutional mandates.

Court Disposition

Declarations granted in part; orders issued to clarify and supplement C.I. 94 to ensure compliance with constitutional requirements.

Orders

  • Inaccurate references in C.I. 94 are to be construed as relating to the intended forms.
  • Regulation 43 is to be read as applying the procedure in Regulation 42 mutatis mutandis to presidential results collation.