Modify reliefs in action seeking to disqualify Mahama from contesting 2024 elections: SC to Ken Kuranchie

Daily Searchlight Newspaper Editor Ken Kuranchie

The Supreme Court has ordered the editor-in-chief of the Daily Searchlight newspaper, Kenneth Kuranchie, to amend two of his appeals in an action seeking to disqualify former president John Dramani Mahama from participating in the 2024 presidential election.

The court order, similar to an earlier one dismissed by the high court in November 2023, questions John Dramani Mahama’s eligibility to seek re-election in the 2024 elections.

Among the solutions, Mr. Kuranchie, who is also a private lawyer, seeks a declaration that, under the true and proper interpretation of Article 66(1) of the 1992 Constitution, clearly stipulates the number of years of a presidential term for be four years.

In court on Wednesday, May 8, the plaintiff requested permission from the court to expand two of his appeals by adding some constitutional provisions to them.

The defendants, Attorney General Godfred Yeboah Dame, John Mahama’s lawyer Tony Lithur and the Speaker of Parliament’s lawyer Thaddeus Sory, did not oppose the application.

Murtala Inusah, Legal Affairs Correspondent of the EIB Network, reported that the panel chaired by the President of the Supreme Court, Gertrude Torkornoo, together with judges Mariama Owusu, Avril Lovelace-Johnson, Henrietta Mensa-Bonsu, Samuel Asiedu, Ernest Gaewu and Yaw Darko Asare, ordered him to amend by May 10. , 2024.

On Wednesday, Kuranchie, who represented himself, said he wants to extend the first two of his main reliefs, seeking to disqualify the former president from running.

The exemptions he sought permission to extend are: “A declaration that, on a true and proper interpretation of Articles 66(1) and (2) of the 1992 Constitution, a person seeking a second presidential term must be a President in excercise”.

And “a declaration that, according to a true and proper interpretation of articles 66 (1) and (2) of the 1992 Constitution, a second presidential term must be consecutive to the first.”

The brief named the Attorney General, former President John Agyekum Kufuor, former President John Dramani Mahama and the Parliament of Ghana as the first and fourth respondents respectively.

Reliefs sought:

The plaintiff requests the following relief from the superior court:

A declaration that, under a true and proper interpretation of Articles 66(1) and (2) of the 1992 Constitution, a person seeking a second presidential term must be a sitting President.

A declaration that, according to a true and proper interpretation of Articles 66 (1) and (2) of the 1992 Constitution, a second presidential term must be consecutive to the first.

A declaration that, upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 68(2) of the 1992 Constitution, a former President of Ghana is under the supervision and control of the Parliament of Ghana in all his future offices.

A declaration that on a true and proper interpretation of Article 68(2) of the 1992 Constitution, a former President of Ghana requires parliamentary approval before he can hold any office other than that of State.

A declaration that on a true and proper interpretation of Article 68(2) of the 1992 Constitution, a former President of Ghana requires parliamentary approval before he can hold any other office providing emolument.

A declaration that, upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 68(3) of the 1992 Constitution, the Office of the President is an emolument-providing office.

In a statement that is based on a true and proper interpretation of article 68 (4), (5), (6), (7), (8) and (9), a former President of Ghana remains an employee of the state .

A declaration that on a true and proper interpretation of Article 62 of the 1992 Constitution, a former President of Ghana is not qualified/eligible to run for President of Ghana.

A declaration that on a true and proper interpretation of Article 68(2) and 290(1)(f) of the 1992 Constitution, the Parliament of Ghana has a binding duty to comply with the provisions of Article 68(2) as such in regards to all former Presidents of Ghana.

An order directed to the fourth respondent to invoke and operationalize section 68(2) of the 1992 Constitution.

An order was addressed to the second and third defendants to compel them to make available to Parliament all commitments, positions, employment and appointments subsequent to their removal as President.

An order ordered the third defendant to fully disclose to parliament the terms of his engagement as a political party flag bearer.

An order directed to the third defendant to seek parliamentary approval for his commitment as a flag bearer of a political party; or, alternatively, an order to the third defendant to desist from his presidential ambitions.

Any other order or orders that the Honorable Court considers appropriate to grant.