Nothing prevents Amewu from being sworn in – Lawyer

    6

    A private legal practitioner has debunked suggestions that the Member of Parliament Elect for the Hohoe Constituency may not be sworn in following ongoing litigations over his parliamentary seat.  

    In an interview with Dennislawgh.com, Mr Yaw Oppong said the directive of the Ho High Court was for specific period, which has elapsed.

    “The Order that was made was for 10days and same has elapsed and of no effect. The Order elapsed on the 2nd January 2021 which is 10 days from 23rd December. In this regard nothing prevents him (John Peter Amewu) from going ahead with the swearing in,” he said Sunday. 

    An interim injunction was sought and same granted by the Ho High Court presided over by Justice George Buadi. This was after an ex parte application was argued by Tsastsu Tsikata, a legal practitioner on behalf of voters residing in Santrokofi, Akpafu, Lolobi and Akpafu.

    In that motion, it was argued that by Article 42, C.I. 95 they were deemed to be part of the Hohoe Constituency and ought to have voted for the Parliamentary Candidate of Hohoe. The Energy Minister, Mr Amewu is therefore a beneficiary of their violated rights and should not be allowed to benefit from such violation until they are made to vote.

    John Peter Amewu, MP-elect for the Hohoe Constituency

    Lawyer Oppong believes that the injunction granted by the court may not be sufficient enough to disallow the victor of the December 7, 2020 election, who polled 54.7% of the total votes cast from representing his constituents in the legislature come 7th January 2021.

    According to him the High Court’s actions have furthered been weakened by a pending suit before the Supreme Court of Ghana on the same matter.

    “The effect for now is that till the Supreme Court makes a determination of same no step can be taken in the High Court,” the Managing Partner of Ampofo and Oppong& Associates argued, alluding to Tuesday’s suit filed by the Attorney-General.

    Among other things state insists that the actions of the Ho High Court constituted a patent error.

    “The High Court has no jurisdiction under article 33 of the Constitution to entertain a matter in the nature of a parliamentary election petition and to grant any relief(s) interim, interlocutory or final, available in a parliamentary election commended under article 99 and section 16 of the Representation of the People’s Law, 1992 (PNDC 284)”.

    “The proceedings of the court below and the orders emanating therefrom dated 23rd December 2020 were void as same were in violation of article 99 of the Constitution,” the suit said.

    Yaw Oppong contends that this case portends great implications for Ghana’s democracy and the development of the law as what the court has been presented with is a novelty.

    Adding that “this is the first time some group of people have been disenfranchised from exercising their right to vote for an MP by an administrative fiat like the Electoral Commission did”