One would have thought that the massive defeat of the Looter Government never witnessed in the annals of Ghanaian history would make it circumspect of how it handles the last days of its dying pangs as a Looter Government so that the Independent Prosecutor may have mercy upon them. Unfortunately impunity and corrupt behavior once internalized is difficult to change over-night as subsequent events show. Ghana is worth dying for and so fellow citizens speak up and defend your 7th December 2016 votes by not allowing this looter Government to deliberately make it impossible for the Government you popularly vote for to govern smoothly upon assuming office on 7th January 2017. Do not sit on the fence at this last hour and allow looters who came into office by the razor-thin majority vote of Justices of the Supreme Court to intimidate fellow citizens Putting Ghana First.

The free market place of ideas for expression of personal opinions appears to have carried some away to assume the President-elect’s prerogative of whom he may appoint into his Government by trying to stampede him with choices for several positions within his administration. What has been and is worrying for me is that some citizens are using this natural democratic process of citizen free expression of expectations and anticipation to telephone or speak face-to-face with individual citizens to suggest that they have, are recommending or intend to recommend them to the President-Elect for particular appointments. It is not in the interest of the President-Elect, his Government or the incoming Parliament. Such actions are inevitably a harbinger of cronyism and corruption in the body polity.

The results of the just ended Presidential and General Elections showed that Ghanaians have voted against the propaganda use of the state-owned media by ignoring all those false and fake news stories published about opponents of the incumbent Government, contrary to the requirements of the Constitution for fair reporting by the state-owned media. The state-owned media cannot continue in the old style of being a ruling Government or party media as opposed to a public media paid for by the tax payer to give citizens impartial reporting of news. It is time that the state-owned media took seriously the independence and freedoms guaranteed them under the Constitution and moved away from self-imposed controls or censorship to please the Government of the day. Corruption takes many forms. Misreporting or skewing reports in consideration of any benefits whatsoever or promotion from the Government is corruption of the media. Let 7th December 2016 be the harbinger of the actualization of a just, fair, transparent and accountable state-owned media reporting under the 1992 Constitution.

The decision that we, the majority of fellow citizens have made at this year’s elections portends hope, expectations and anticipation in each of us who put Ghana First at the ballot for good governance, the rule of law, probity, accountability and transparency in the coming four years of the administration of the President Elect, his Government and the Parliament Elect. I congratulate and thank you all, once more, fellow citizens for your Gargantuan efforts in heeding the advocacy of the various civil society and activist organizations in enhancing constitutionalism and democracy at this year’s elections in changing this Government. God bless you all, God bless the Republic of Ghana and may God let us always Put Ghana First.

In this affidavit I contend that the Government of Ghana’s interest is not in enforcing the order of the Supreme Court. Instead, the incumbent Government represented by the Attorney General is merely giving the appearance of enforcing the order of the Court while simultaneously entering into a confidentiality agreement with Alfred Agbesi Woyome as Executive Chairman, a director, and sole shareholder of Anator Holding. This discreet agreement aims to facilitate Woyome’s ability to refund the monies ordered by this Court. Such actions by the incumbent Government negate the letter and spirit of Article 2 of the 1992 Constitution and the enforcement jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Moreover, I maintain that under Article 2 of the 1992, when the Attorney General is being sued for unconstitutional conduct, and a declaration of unconstitutionality is made against the Attorney General, it will be a negation of the letter and spirit of the Constitution to say that the public interest Plaintiff who has prosecuted the action has no capacity to ensure proper and effective execution of the order, even when the Attorney General’s actions are not of substance for purposes of enforcing the decisions and order of the Supreme Court.

Woyome has accused me in the media of having ordered or authorized the Ministry of Finance to pay him part of the GHC51.2million that the incumbent Government unconstitutionally looted for him. However, the fact that I had nothing to do with the authorizations written to the Ministry of Finance to pay any portion of the looted public purse to Woyome was already determined finally in the declarations made by the Supreme Court on 29th July 2014. Moreover, the Government’s own “Commission of Enquiry Into Payments From Public Funds Arising From Judgment Debts & Akin Matters (2012/C.I 79)” commended my honesty and integrity in the matter. The media and the public are being hoodwinked by Woyome’s outburst and the incumbent Government’s overwhelming silence to set the records straight. Citizens, you have a choice to make. How much longer will we hear stories of inadvertence, mischief and connivance by an incumbent Government that strips the Republic’s coffers bare so that ordinary Ghanaians must suffer financial hardship? PUT GHANA FIRST and let us get our looted money back by voting the incumbent looter Government out on 7th December 2016. Protect Ghana and the government purse by voting for a new President.

I believe that the application for stay of proceedings is only intended to subvert the order of the Supreme Court dated 16th November 2016 for the examination of the 3rd defendant/judgment debtor/applicant, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, who has since the ruling of the Supreme Court on 16th November 2016 stated in several interviews on radio, television and via electronic media that he considers himself being persecuted by the Supreme Court and that he would do everything to the last drop of his blood to prevent the Court from enforcing the order of 16th November 2016 for his examination

First we have the outbursts of Woyome as the losing party in court, which may be ignored as tension relieving therapy for a wounded ego, emotions, and mental exhaustion. Woyome and the media may continue with their contempt of the Court while the decision and order are pending. I will not be part of it. Second we have the accusations of a Deputy Attorney General who opts to try his case in the court of public opinion because he proved to be incompetent on the day. Since when did it become ethical practice to resort to print and electronic media as the medium of arguing an appeal or review of the decision of a Court of law where Ayine has lost? Third, we have the President of the Republic of Ghana – sworn by constitutional oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution – who is shown on television castigating the decision of the Supreme Court. Should we be concerned that as the chief looter in this case, the President is determined to prevent the examination ordered by the Court? Is the President (with the Executive Authority including all policing powers) not then intimidating me simply for exercising my constitutional right to access to justice before the Supreme Court? I say again countrymen and women with all my soul and with all my heart that: “Defend the 1992 Constitution by voting for a new President on 7th December 2016 to get our money back.”

Government is purposefully deceiving the electorate that efforts are being made to retrieve the unconstitutional loot by Woyome jointly with Austro-Invest, the client of Lithur-Brew and Co, a law firm in which the Attorney General was a partner. Woyome’s part-payment in a cheque drawn by Woyome in favour of the Economic and Organized Crime Office, which was not a party to the action or the judgment creditor, cannot be a cheque in part payment of the unconstitutional monies ordered by the Court to be refunded to the Republic. Unfortunately, the Government as the leading looter has put obstacles in our way in enforcing the orders of the Court. Do not be hoodwinked by electioneering ploys. Let us defend the 1992 Constitution by voting for a new President on 7th December 2016 to get our money back.

The drunken tantrums cowardly thrown by Omane Boamah show the shallowness of his education, understanding, and lack of diligence and industry in researching matters on which he is to defend the Government in public. Simple common sense would have informed the almighty Minister of Communications who sought to take over Multi TV/Joy FM to insult me that in arguing my case before the Supreme Court on 10th November 2016, I referred the Court to its own unanimous decision given in my favour on 29th July 2014. I am constrained from making any further comment on the case apart from calling the public’s attention to the final decision of the Supreme Court, a public record, in respect of Austro-Invest Management Services Limited which is admitted to have been the client of Lithur-Brew and Co, the firm of the current Attorney General.

The eyes of every citizen have been opened to the arbitrary conduct and impunity exhibited by the Electoral Commissioner, and the political parties are now fully aware as to how the power of the Commissioner can be wantonly abused. Let us watch the rigging agenda of the Commissioner and her mentors during the remaining election period. She has already engineered elections in such a way that a good six weeks have been lost for the campaign period of the NDP, PPP, and the PNC. Her actions affect the equal right and facilities for political campaigning mandatorily enjoined by the Constitution. Fellow citizens be alert to the Commissioner’s other tricks. The Commissioner cannot be trusted to fairly implement her mandate under the 1992 Constitution without vigilance on our part. We must defend the Constitution!

Congratulations president elect, Donald trump, may your stand against corruption, cronyism, patronage, and disguised political extortion by the political establishment and their greedy allies make not only America but the whole world great again.

The Electoral Commissioner is using technical grounds to render nugatory the decision and orders of the Supreme Court, where the Court ordered that “in appropriate cases to afford candidates the opportunity to comply with regulation ((2) of the Public Election Regulations, 2016 (C.I. 94)”. She is taking advantage of the Supreme Court’s ruling to wager on the fact that she is entitled by the Court’s ruling within the new nomination period to put forth alleged new and profound errors that will make it impossible for even Nduom and those others who have judgments in their favour, to alter or amend the specific errors for which they obtained their respective judgments in the High Court. Let us wait for how the Supreme Court will rise to the occasion of this new twist to its ruling should any applications be made to it today.

I would like to assure all public spirited Ghanaians that should I be given the opportunity to examine the Judgment Debtor, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, in Court the good people of Ghana will hear and see the beneficiaries of the unconstitutional judgment debt in the NDC and this Government. Gargantuan crimes were indeed committed as I stated in 2012. Corruption is trying to prevent the public from hearing the whole story from the horse’s own mouth. I challenge the honesty and integrity of the President and the Government to allow the examination of its financier, the Judgment Debtor, Alfred Agbesi Woyome to proceed without hindrance if they have nothing to hide.

The Electoral Commissioner has effectively rigged the election. She does not appear to understand that the letter and spirit of the 1992 Constitution enjoins her to ensure that every political party and its aspiring presidential candidate or an individual aspirant has equal time and opportunity to canvass for the votes of the electorate. There can be no free, transparent and fair elections when disqualified aspiring candidates have their names added to the ballot more than three weeks belatedly, because the Commissioner’s preferred and approved candidates would have had an unequal advantage over them in the contest for the Presidency. Nobody can convince such candidates, their political parties, and supporters and the objective observer that they had a level playing field for the 7th December 2016 elections within the letter and spirit of the Constitution.

The EC Commissioner's arbitrary and unlawful disqualification of 13 aspiring presidential candidates and her arrogant attitude towards those distinguished citizens and their political parties or supporters does not conduce to her image as an impartial arbiter of elections. In Ghana's present circumstances the plurality of political parties fielding candidates at the presidential elections is the only guarantee to effectively policing the process by the presence, and alertness of their supporters, polling assistants and others at the polling stations on the day of elections. Whosoever wins the 2016 Presidential Elections must do so transparently and fairly. We must put Ghana First by equalizing the disadvantages of the political parties in opposition to ensure that they have a fair and even chance against any abuse of incumbency by this Government which is definitely very desperate to remain in power after eight years. Let us watch every step of this Electoral Commissioner in this election year.

Herewith my rejoinder on the expressions of disagreement by two lawyers, Messrs. George Loh and Ayikoi Otoo with portions of my case commentary on the Owners of the Station – Montie FM criminal contempt case.

It is beyond argument that the Supreme Court is clothed with the power to commit for contempt of itself under the 1992 Constitution. But the same Constitution enjoins the Supreme Court to exercise all its powers in accordance with the due process of law and to respect the fundamental human rights and freedoms guaranteed under it. In view of this, the decision in the Owners of the Station Montie FM criminal contempt of court case raises several issues of constitutional, professional, and public importance. Upon further reading, my conclusion is that the lawyers for the accused persons did not help the Court and the accused persons when they failed or refused to raise all the constitutional and legal defences against the charges and arraignment processes.

I examine and analyze the memorandum to or accompanying the Bill to see whether or not it complies with Article 106 (2) of the Constitution to warrant its introduction in Parliament and conclude that it does not. I proceed to examine and analyze selected provisions of the Bill and adduce reasons why they may be unconstitutional, inconsistent with existing law, or need to be harmonized with the existing law to achieve the objects of Article 106(2) of the Constitution in addressing defects in the existing law and providing remedies to those defects in the Bill. I conclude with the conviction that the civil liberties of Ghanaians may require that the Bill be withdrawn to enable it meet the constitutional precondition for it to be properly introduced in Parliament.

We should stop subjectively attacking personalities unless we have credible supporting evidence. I am disappointed that a non-partisan civil society organization such as Let My Vote Count Alliance has stooped so low in making unsubstantiated charges of political bias against named constitutionally protected public officers, simply because they had been nominated to represent their respective public institutions on the now well-known Electoral Commission’s Steering Committee for Election 2016. What is more relevant is that good and strong institutions with institutional cultures dictate what persons appointed to those offices do, and not where those persons are coming from.