SC voter roll ruling: Go to court if EC is wrong – NDC

File a suit at the Supreme Court to seek further clarification “if you feel” the Electoral Commission’s interpretation of the Supreme Court ruling on the register of voters is not appropriate, the National Organiser of the governing National Democratic Congress (NDC), Mr Kofi Adams has told critics of the election management body.

“We are a country that is governed by law, if you feel that per your understanding, somebody is not implementing the orders of a court, you go back to the court. The court gave orders to the EC who have come out publicly to state their understanding of the orders, if anyone thinks the EC is wrong, that person has the right to go to court and ask for further direction based on his understanding,” Mr Adams said in an interview with Prince Minkah on Class91.3FM’s Executive Breakfast Show on Monday May 20.

In a case between the PNC’s Abu Ramadan and the EC over the credibility of the register of voters, the Supreme Court ordered the EC to clean the register by deleting names of those who registered with their National Health Insurance Scheme cards. The court also said minors and foreigners should be expunged from the roll.

The EC, in a statement on Thursday May 19, said the ruling does not render void the eligibility of persons who registered with the national health insurance card hence their names will not be removed.

“For persons who registered with NHIA cards, such registrations were lawful at the time of registration, and the subsequent declaration of unconstitutionality in the earlier Abu Ramadan case, does not ‘automatically render them void’” the EC interpreted the ruling as meaning.

The statement, signed by Deputy Chair Georgina Opoku Amankwaa said such a position, according to the Supreme Court, “would have the effect of disenfranchising the persons affected. Such registrations should only be deleted by means of processes established under the law”.

According to Mr Adams, the response by the EC falls in line with his own understanding of the ruling. He argued that the mandate of the apex court is to provide counsel, but not to go into the specifics of how the EC should do its work.

“They [EC] should just go ahead and implement as they understood it because that was what it was intended for. The Supreme Court was very clear and said they should apply a lawful way to doing things and that it will not direct them. Directing the EC as to how it should do its work will be going against the very constitution it is protecting. Their responsibility is to give a general guideline, how to correct it cannot be directed by the Supreme Court”.

Mr Adams indicated that the EC has already stated that it will find ways to deal with people who are perceived to be deceased but are still on the register. The Commission has also indicated that during the exhibition, it will check those who are not supposed to be in the register, Mr Adams pointed out.