Ghana needs credible ID system— Supreme Court
The Supreme Court says there is the need for a credible and reliable multipurpose national identification system that will answer relevant national information needs.
Advertisement
Such a system, it said, should comprise relevant data and communication infrastructure for electoral, spatial planning or other developmental purposes.
It, therefore, called on the appropriate authorities to respond to that need.
The Supreme Court’s call was contained in a 23-page document that detailed the reasons for its ruling in which three persons sued the Electoral Commission (EC) of Ghana over its decision to use the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) card as a form of identification for the recent voters registration exercise.
“The need for a credible and reliable multipurpose national identification system, comprising the relevant data and communication infrastructure that would answer to most of our national needs, whether for electoral, planning or developmental, or other purposes, is greater than ever before. We think the time has come for the appropriate authorities to respond to this need,” it said.
EC restrained
The Supreme Court on July 29, 2014 slapped a perpetual injunction on the EC, restraining it from using National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) identification cards, in their current form, as a form of identity for voters registration in the country.
In a unanimous decision, the court also ruled that existing voter identity cards, other than the biometric one issued in 2012, could be used as forms of identity for voter registration.
The court, presided over by the Chief Justice, Mrs Justice Georgina Theodora Wood, had other members as Mrs Justice Sophia Adinyirah, Mr Justice Jones Dotse, Mr Justice Anin Yeboah, Mr Justice Nasiru Sulley Gbadegbe, Mr Justice Albert A. Benin and Mr Justice J.B. Akamba.
The ruling followed an action instituted by Mr Abu Ramadan, the National Youth Organiser of the People’s National Convention (PNC), Mr Evans Nimako, a farmer, and Mr Kwasi Danso Acheampong, a lawyer.
They had asked the highest court of the land for proper interpretation of Article 42 of the 1992 Constitution which states, "Every citizen of Ghana of 18 years of age or above and of sound mind has the right to vote and is entitled to be registered as a voter for the purposes of public elections and referenda".
The plaintiffs argued that since one was not necessarily required to be a citizen to hold an NHIS card, accepting the card as a basis to register a person to vote in national elections was a violation of the Constitution.
The court had, in an earlier ruling, asked the EC to stop its public advertisement on the voter registration exercise while it determined the case.
Reasons for the ruling
In its reasons for the ruling, the Supreme Court said that if the right to vote was important in a participatory democracy, the right to register was even more fundamental and critical.
“It is the golden key that opens the door to exercising the right to vote,” it said.
That, it said, imposed a heavy responsibility on the EC in ensuring the exercise of the constitutional right to vote.
A perfect system is utopian but…
A perfect electoral system, the court said, was utopian but the structures should, on balance, “not undermine, detract from, dilute, nor whittle down the right to qualify to be registered”.
That, it said, was the first crucial step that enabled the citizen to vote without which the entrenched right to franchise remained an illusion.
None of the processes and systems, in that regard, the court said, “must be inconsistent with or conflict with the constitution,” else it risked being “struck down on grounds of unconstitutionality”.
In the ruling against the use of the NHIS card, the court explained that apart from the NHIS card, all the other listed documents required to establish a person’s qualification had clear information.
NHIS card is unreliable
“The NHIS card, however, is the only document among the lot, that does not provide undoubted information on the holder’s nationality,” it said.
The NHIS card, according to the Supreme Court, identified the holder by name and face but made no disclosure about the holder’s identity and thus failed to meet the “citizenship restriction test”.
The court said it had given anxious consideration to the claim that the NHIS card was the most widely used document but it juxtaposed that against the constitutional mandate on it to uphold constitutional supremacy.
EC’s argument was dangerous
It said that the argument by the EC that the presentation of an identification document was only for the purpose of inclusion of an applicant’s name in the provisional list and the further argument that there was an inherent process for challenge of unqualified individuals was “dangerous and must be rejected”.
In the court’s view, the challenge mechanism was the final window of opportunity for removing the names of unscrupulous individuals, who in spite of the necessary due diligence, had managed to slip through the net, beat the system and fraudulently managed to have their names included as qualified.