Pratt Questions Appropriateness Of IEA’s “Don’t Seek Review” Appeal To Parties

Ahead of the final verdict of the Election Petition case, the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) recently urged parties involved in the case in whose favour the expected judgement of the Supreme Court may not be, to refrain from seeking a review in the interest of peace.

The economic think tank believes this will “facilitate the process of national reconciliation and unity”.

The IEA’s statement, which was issued on Monday, called on the winning party “to refrain from provocative victory celebrations and taunting of the other party”. It also urged all Ghanaians to remain calm and trust in the competence of the Supreme Court to deliver a fair judgement.

But the IEA’s appeal, especially the part that wants the Petitioners and Respondents not to go for a judicial review of the court’s ruling, has been roundly spurned by many including the Managing Editor of the Insight Newspaper; Kwesi Pratt Jnr., who wonders its appropriateness.

“The case (Election Petition) before the Supreme Court is a very serious one and dear to the hearts of all Ghanaians. Many, prior to the verdict are advising on how to ensure peace. Some directives are good…but some can also lead to something else in this country.

“…It’s worrying if the IEA is asking parties involved in the petition case not to seek for a review after the verdict. The review process is a law not a destructive force,” he stated.

He questioned why such a call was not made when the petitioners publicly declared their intention to seek the Court’s clarification on the outcome of the 2012 elections.

“We must test the law as Ghanaians. Apart from testing the law, it also can help find out ways to amend it if possible…If the law says you can review a case after verdict, why then must we stop that? Why are we stopping the law?…the IEA’s call is perhaps to scare people to abandoned their rights to apply for a review”.

“…If one is applying for a review without vandalism, what is wrong about that? The IEA’s reasons for that might be good but it is not right to impede someone’s right,” he added.

Comments