Samson Lardy Anyenini says he does not believe the grounds for the disqualification of all the 12 presidential candidates are the same in that the recall of one might necessitate the comeback of all of them.
"I don't think that the facts are the same. You would find that in Nduom’s case the court found as a matter of fact that he was simply not given the opportunity that the law said he ought to have been given required," he told Francis Abban, host of Joy FM’s Midday News programme, Friday.
The ruling by Justice Eric Kyei Baffuor in a matter in which presidential candidate of the Progressive People's Party (PPP), Dr Papa Kwesi Nduom was challenging his disqualification by the Electoral Commission (EC) has been hailed by some Ghanaians as a victory for democracy.
The judge directed the Commission to act in accordance with Regulation 9 of C.I.94, the law governing this year’s election, by giving the business mogul the opportunity to amend his nomination form for resubmission.
He failed to uphold the argument by the EC lawyer, Thaddeus Sory that the economist's lawyer, Ayikoi Otoo used the wrong procedure to have the issue addressed. Mr Sory had argued in court Tuesday that the disqualification of Dr Nduom should have been done through a petition and not a certiorari or writ as was done.
But Justice Baffuor explained before delivering the judgment that it was never the case that C.I.94 requires aggrieved individuals to seek justice exclusively by a petition. He was emphatic that as long as Dr Nduom was seeking a review of a decision by an administrative body, in this case the EC, he used the right procedure.
He also added that arguments that the court has no power to order the EC to execute its functions as dictated by the law was pedestrian and false.
Just when some Ghanaians have argued that the ruling presents a good opportunity for the other candidates who are in court challenging their disqualification, the lawyer has disagreed.
Mr Anyenini who hosts Joy FM/MultiTV’s flagship programme on Saturday Newsfile said the grounds the candidates were disqualified varied.
Nonetheless, he said the responsibility lies on the Commission to make a determination regarding how it would address the complaints of the other candidates.
“The EC was required to do two things according to the law not only to set a nomination day, but also a nomination period,” he said, adding if the Commission had been minded to follow the law, it would have set a nomination day and a period to afford the parties the opportunity to make amendments.
He suggested the EC might consider using an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) to examine the various issues and find an amicable way of meeting the demands.
Mr Anyenini also said the EC boss, Charlotte Osei's claim that she granted a five-minute hearing to Dr Nduom “was to take the issue not serious because the opportunity required by the law has to be before the disqualification and ought to end in amendment or correction.”