Election 2020: Court is the best option – Gatsi

Dean of the Business School of the University of Cape Coast Professor John Gatsi has called for a legal action against the Electoral Commission (EC) to compel the elections management body to explain disparity claims with regard to the results of the recently held general elections.

The opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) has rejected the results as announced by the EC.

The Presidential Candidate of the NDC, John Dramani Mahama, said the results were manipulated in favour of the governing New Patriotic Party (NPP).

Mr Mahama had indicated that the party will consider a legal action against the EC.

READ ALSO: Give NDC their parliamentary win & Akufo-Addo the presidential – Carl Wilson

In an opinion piece on the elections, Professor Gasti stated: “Just as the rejection of the election results put demands of the Electoral Commission, security agencies and government, it is important for the party and candidates who rejected the results to appreciate the responsibility to voters. The responsibilities include- explaining and making available to voters and key stakeholders the facts and the evidence. If the electoral Commission does not act timely, this should trigger legal action.

“Refusal to go to court as the final game plan will create huge reputation challenges.  At the court the electoral commission will be cross examined with relevant questions and the public will know everything and judge for themselves. A political party has the future  in mind in all of   it’s strategic games.

“We should accept and unite to resolve the electoral problems now. Hypocrisy does not promote peace , it only silence people and plant pain and bitterness  in their hearts and daily meditation to emerge at a later date and perhaps in another form.  We do not have angels in political parties, the Electoral Commission and government . We should accept that mistakes can occur and sometimes they maybe intentional. That is why we must  work together.”

Read below his full post…

Rejection of 2020 Presidential Results. Congratulations and Observers Report: My Comment as a voter- Prof. John Gatsi

In a democracy rejecting election results based on concrete facts and documented evidence is a strong weapon to protect democracy, preserve the votes of voters and legitimize continuous participation in elections.  If the picture is painted as though ones unacceptable results are declared nothing can be done to secure the votes of the electorates, we create mistrust in democratic pillars of election, vote accountability and transparency.

The weight of damage to democratic institutional quality, trust and legitimacy of a government cannot be measured. It takes maximum of 4hours to correct alleged errors to ensure peace.  It seems some people still think peace means absence of war. In terms of elections the absence of demonstrations, call for the right thing to be done,  inability to express emotional pain of proven theft of votes  means peace.  Accepting results one believes with evidential value of fraud, misreporting, disregard for the rules of engagement only piles up anger that may explode later. The time tested remedial process in elections may confirm the candidate who was earlier declared winner or the candidate who rejected the results may become the winner. What is important is that at the end of the remedial process transparency is given a chance  and independence and voter satisfaction is achieved. Just as consumption of a service or a product gives utility , voters maximize their utility or satisfaction with a transparent process. ,

Foreign observers report and congratulations

The European Union (EU) Observers reported that voters freely participated in voting at the polling stations but collation was not transparent or collation does not meet the minimum standard required to declare elections results. The votes cast by voters generated votes( data) through counting as required at the polling stations. Per the EU observers the votes generated at the polling stations meet the standard required and that the polling accounts or the vote data generated at the polling stations can be relied upon for the purposes of declaration. The observers are clearly saying there is credibility problem with the vote data generated at the point of collation and transmission.

If declared results are rejected based on these observations, the best response is do the collation again especially at the constituencies and regions where the alleged errors occurred.