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.

Commonsense should have warned the Plaintiff/Respondent that an ordinary bench of this court hearing his Writ of Summons and Statement of Case will have no jurisdiction to declare the ruling of the review bench in Amidu (No 3) v Attorney General, Waterville (BVI) Ltd & Woyome (No 2) (2013-2014) 1 SCGLR 606 null and void or in any other manner attempt to review same under the smokescreen of exercising any original jurisdiction in this action.

The nature of the reliefs sought by the Plaintiff, Abdulai Yusif Fansah Muhammed, from the Supreme Court in this action are clearly stated on three of them to be for the benefit of Alfred Agbesi Woyome and the exoneration of the Attorney-General who unconstitutionally paid the judgment debt to Woyome. Why has the Plaintiff decided to join them as the 1st and 2nd Defendants in this action to create the impression that his interest diverges from theirs? Are they really Defendants or is the Plaintiff their surrogate? That is the answer to look from their responses to the Plaintiff’s case.

I am deliberately exposing the politicization of the White Paper on the Commissioner’s report to enable people capable of rational and dispassionate reasoning see the inherent dangers any Government faces when it usurps the powers of the Attorney-General or when an Attorney-General allows his office to be usurped or abused by the Presidency. It also underscores what happens when a Government acts deliberately and covertly to cover political corruption by besmearing other coordinate organs of Government and political opponents in a manner inconsistent with or in contravention of the constitution.

In my whole life I have never courted praise or approbation in playing out my character. I would rather stand for what I believe to be the truth even if it means I stand alone. No insults or name calling will change that after more than 64 years of my existence. I should be able to tell my maker when I get out or up there or wherever it may be, that I served Him or Her to the best of my ability; I served the Holy Catholic Church to the best of my human ability; I served my nation truly and served my people.

When one reads the leaked report of the Sole Judgment Debt Commissioner one is left in no doubt of the excellent work the Commissioner had been able to undertake within the short period at his disposal for such an enormous assignment. Of course as a distinguished lawyer who had risen from the High Court to the Court of Appeal, the erudition displayed in his work attests to his competence as a judge that ought to make members of the legal profession and fellow citizens proud. Unfortunately, the Government is playing politics and propaganda with such excellent work by .

In the Government covert agent’s own words: “‘I have my intelligence where he is currently at…and I believe we will get there. I think that he outsmarted us and left but it’s not the end of the road yet,’ he said on Joy FM’s Super Morning show, Tuesday.”

Accountable and transparent answers with utmost integrity to my above claims will establish once and for all that Anas Aremeyaw Anas and his Tiger Eye PI on his website are a credible business under the laws of Ghana and not an international criminal and fraudulent scam.

Government has for some time been acting unconstitutionally with an unregistered and fraudulent Tiger Eye PI in promoting an Orwellian Big Brother State and McCarthyism in this country which must be fought before Ghana becomes fully an autocratic one party state.

My intention is to stand up for principles underpinning the Constitution which every citizen is enjoined to defend and not to attack any individual personally that is why I have avoided mentioning people by name in my latest articles where I can avoid it. I insist that it is unconstitutional for this Government to use any covert agent for operations against citizens to hide its Gargantuan political corruption like Nerquaye-Tetteh’s golden handshake of GH₵400,000

Exposing a farcical state of affairs where corrupt judges are removed, corrupt attorneys are rewarded and corrupt politicians are protected. Government ingenuity insures that part of the truth is suppressed and allows public anger to be turned away from political corruption to the judicial scandal. But the truth will always stand, no matter how long it takes to come to the light.

When the Presidency is reduced to a leaking pot of correspondence, such actions magnify perceptions of corruption from the Presidency and the Government, as the lack of integrity and honour in governance is an integral part of the manifestation of endemic corruption.

A number of Ghanaians have called me to ask how much Waterville is to refund to the Republic of Ghana as a consequence of the decision and orders of the Supreme Court dated 14th June 2013. This is apparently because of late the media has carried the story that Waterville has taken the Government to international arbitration to challenge an order for the refund of €25 million made by the Supreme Court. No explanation appears to be coming from Government sources to indicate the total amount of refund to be made by Waterville is €47,365,624.40. I have therefore deemed it necessary to address this issue relating to the Waterville decision and order as the citizen public interest Plaintiff in this matter.