Mahama files fresh document at SC attacking interrogatories ruling says it was not supported by law

Mahama files fresh document at SC attacking interrogatories ruling says it was not supported by law

The National Democratic Congress (NDC)’s 2020 Presidential Candidate has filed a fresh document at the Supreme Court, describing its ruling dismissing the application to serve interrogatories on the Electoral Commission (EC) as one not supported by law.

Attacking the decision of the apex court, John Dramani Mahama said the ruling was made without regards to the Constitution in Article 129(4) and its own judgment in Ex parte Magna International Transport Ltd and Bernard Mornah v. The Attorney-General.

Already, the lawyers of Mr Mahama have filed a motion for a review of the Supreme Court’s decision and it is expected to be heard on Tuesday, January 26, 2021.

The fresh document which is a supplement to the motion for the review of the ruling is arguing that the apex court’s judgment was “per incuriam Article 129(4) of the Constitution as well as its own earlier decision in Ex parte Magna International Transport and Bernard Mornah v. The Attorney-General.”

Article 129(4) of the Constitution 1992 provides that: “For the purposes of hearing and determining a matter within its jurisdiction and the amendment, execution or the enforcement of a judgment or order made on any matter, and for the purposes of any other authority, expressly or by necessary implication given to the Supreme Court by this Constitution or any other law, the Supreme Court shall have all the powers, authority and jurisdiction vested in any court established by this Constitution or any other law.”

Touching on the Article, Mr Mahama’s lawyers argue that the provision elevates the power granted by the Constitution to the Supreme Court over the one given by a statute. Therefore, the powers of the court could not be taken by a statute.

Similarly, in Bernard Mornah v. Attorney-General, the Court held that any attempt to remove the Supreme Court’s review jurisdiction or a party’s right to apply for a review except through an amendment under the Constitution would be unconstitutional.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *