Chief Executive Officer for Atta Mills Institute, Koku Anyidoho, has justified the remarks made by Dr. Afari-Gyan, former Electoral Commission boss with regards to why the EC must be an independent body without any interference.
He acknowledged that the EC should not take instructions from any person or body external to the Commission as cited by the former EC chairperson according to the 1992 constitution.
Dr. Afari Gyan had earlier stated that “the Constitution clearly says that in doing its work, the EC should not take instructions from any person or body external to the Commission. The IPAC is such a body. Accordingly, IPAC decisions cannot be binding on the EC. If they were, it would, in effect, amount to nothing less that meddling with the independence of the commission”.
In supporting this stance, Koku Anyidoho noted that IPAC was created by the Electoral Commission (EC), as an Administrative Organ that provides political parties with a more than fair opportunity to constantly and continuously share ideas on a common platform for the healthy enhancement of democratic and electoral processes.
He questioned the purpose for which some people want IPAC to be given legal status knowing well that it would be an affront to the dictates of the constitution.
“What are the concerns that have been ignored and/or marginalised? Concerns that tend to dictate to the EC and expressly flout Article 46 of the 1992 Constitution? We should give IPAC legal status just because some voices believe that the EC is refusing to do their bidding? Is that what the voices are demanding?”
He argued that, nothing stops the IPAC from sharing thoughts and helping the nation broaden its electoral landscape positively as an advisory body.
The Atta-Mills Institute Founder believes that it would be chaotic for any form of legislation to back IPAC due to the tendency for political parties to run the EC per their whims.
“And to the extent that the political parties, (at least the two larger ones), will never see eye-to-eye and will always want to have the advantage over each other in order to saddle the governance horse, would the nation not be calling for chaos if any form of legislation is allowed to back IPAC?”, he queried.
Describing advocates as hypocrites, he said “how many of the political parties really get the base of their parties involved in hardcore decision-making? At the congresses where they effect changes to the constitutions; do Parties really allow for deep and proper debates before amendments are made?”
Koku Anyidoho concluded that Ghana cannot belong to only political parties and as such staunchly concurs with Dr. Kwadwo Afari-Gyan that electoral reforms cannot be the in the minds and bosom of only the representatives of political parties.
