Court adjourns NDP case

However, according to the party, it was not privy to certain information, the lack of which deprived it from benefiting from relevant advice in respect of the application at the time it was filed on October 25, 2012.

Consequently, counsel for the party filed the application to seek leave to amend.

The motion was not opposed by the EC.

The NDP, as a party, and its flag bearer, Nana Konadu AgyemangRawlings, instituted the action against the EC and the Attorney-General (A-G) but it appears the A-G is disinterested in the matter because his office had not entered any appearance.

According to the NDP, the decision by the EC to reject Nana Konadu’s nomination forms was wrong and inconsistent with the electoral laws and the 1992 Constitution.

It said it was also against the flag bearer’s fundamental human right, as enshrined in the Constitution.

On October 19, 2012, the EC rejected the nomination forms of the former First Lady and flag bearer of the NDP, citing major errors on her forms.

Other parties that had their forms rejected were the Independent People’s Party (IPP), the New Vision Party (NVP), the YES People’s Party (YPP) and the Democratic Freedom Party (DFP).

The IPP and the NVP are also known to have gone to court to seek redress.

The NDP had said it believed that the rejection of its flag bearer’s nomination was a calculated attempt by certain individuals who had connived with the EC to collapse the party for it to return to the fold of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), the party from which the NDP emerged.
Story by Stephen Sah