Ghana’s former Attorney-General, Joseph Nii Ayikoi Otoo, has said the petition by one Kwame Ofosu-Appiah seeking the removal of the Electoral Commission (EC) Chair and her deputies is not substantial.
He says the allegations against Jean Adukwei Mensa and her deputies are not strong enough, indicating that what one ascribes to, prior to holding an office, is different from what he does after assuming an office.
According to him, the personal opinions expressed by members on the Commission prior to their appointments cannot be used against them, but has argued that their deeds whilst in office, should be the bone of contention.
Mr. Ofosu-Appiah also stated in his petition for the removal of the EC Chair and her deputies that Madam Jean Mensa used her discretion to disenfranchise residents of Santrokofi, Akpafu, Likpe, and Lolobi (SALL) in the 2020 parliamentary elections.
But in his reaction, Nii Ayikoi Otoo noted that “I have looked at it, and they do not think that they meet the very serious issues that one would want to look at when we want to remove the EC. I don’t see any of those things as very serious.”
He said some of the statements being used against the officials were made before coming to office and should not suffice for their removal.
“In your intro, you said that the things one of the deputies was alleged to have said were when he was exercising his academic freedom. You know, young men can take to doing all sorts of things, such as even experimenting with drugs. And then they grow up, they wean themselves off those things. They realize that it’s not the best. I mean, these are not things that ought to have engaged themselves. It doesn’t mean that they are forever barred from holding office or doing anything,” he stated.
Likening the situation to individuals who make personal statements before taking sensitive positions, such as judges, he said “before he became a judge, he was a free individual. Now that he has become a judge and taken the oath, he says, ‘Look, I’m bound by my oath, and nobody can influence me. This is my decision.
“This is what I want to do.’ So, the things he said when exercising academic freedom, I think we should forget about it and concentrate on what they have done since they came to office.”
The former Attorney General also emphasized that the Chief Justice is the appropriate authority to determine whether the issues raised in the petition meet the threshold for removal.
“It is for the CJ to determine whether it can be said to be of any weight. From where I sit, I don’t see anything weighty enough to justify their removal,” he said.
Stressing on the SALL matter, he noted that although it is frustrating that the residents were disenfranchised, he cautioned that the issue be tackled in the broader perspective rather than narrowing it to individual decisions.
He said it is not proper to use isolated issues to determine one’s incompetence or misconduct.
“These are serious constitutional matters, and while people are entitled to seek redress, we must be careful not to rush into conclusions that undermine institutions,” he said.
Content by : Felix Anim-Appau
