Let's take second look at winner-takes-all system

Ghana needs to take a second look at the current winner-takes-all political system to ensure harmony and political balance.

Making the call at an Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) organized roundtable discussions on the Constitution Review in Accra, the participants observed that the winner-takes-all system had led to enmity, division and sabotage of the national agenda.

Mr Ernest Abotsi, a lecturer of the Ghana Institute of Public Administration; Mr Peter Mac Manu, a former New Patriotic Party (NPP) National Chairman; Prof.  Daniel Adzei Bekoe, a Senior Fellow of the IEA; Mr Kwame Pianim, a leading member of the NPP; Prof.  S.K.B Asante, an international consultant and educationist and Mr Alfred Agbesi, the Member of Parliament (MP) for Ashaiman, all agreed that the current system had polarised the country.

Under the theme, "Ghana's winner-takes-all system: What are the Alternatives beyond proportional representation?" the programme is part of the IEA Constitution Review Series.

The platform provides the opportunity for political stakeholders and civil society to reach a consensus on proposals to influence the ongoing constitution review implementation process.

Delivering a lecture on the theme, Mr Abotsi said as the country "strives to improve on the fortunes and prospects of the constitutional regime, the issue of the winner taking all needs a careful review and redressing to avoid the pitfalls engendered by its practice."

He also said while the provision was ostensibly designed to reinforce the tenets of democratic governance which was both co-operative and competitive, it had led to a number of unintended consequences.

"Beyond the allocation and distribution of political power at the apex level, the dynamic of political partisanship has had and continue to have systemic effect on nearly all faucets of governance dealing with resource allocation and distribution and general entitlements in Ghana."

That, he said, had led to a situation where "Ghana under the Fourth Republic has been marked by compulsory retirements, terminations and dismissals of persons working in the civil and public services, abrogation of contracts, cancellations of entitlements and general persecutions of certain political opponents or persons deemed as such," he said.

Ghana's fourth republic cannot develop without the government in power reaching out to the opposition parties.

In 1992, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) went into alliance with the National Convention Party (NCP) led by the late Ekow Nkensen Arkaah who eventually became the country's Vice President between 1992 and 1997.

Mr Owuraku Amofa of the EGLE Party was also a deputy Tourism Minister during the Rawlings' regime.

In the current NDC administration, Alhassan Azong, a People's National Convention MP for Builsa South, is serving as a minister of state at the presidency, responsible for public sector reforms.

During the Kufuor regime, Dr Paa Kwesi Nduom, who was a member of the Convention Peoples' Party (CPP) held different ministerial portfolios and Mallam Issah, a PNC member also became a Minister of Youth and Sports.

Those appointments notwithstanding, Mr Abotsi said  "the constitution may seem to have contemplated political inclusiveness as a value and virtue, false assumptions that parties would reach out have led to the regime of winner taking all, since the commencement of the regime. "

While stating that proportional representation was not a way out of the conundrum, he also added that merely suggesting political inclusiveness without addressing the fundamental causes would be futile.

Contributing to the discussions, Prof. Bekoe said it was obvious that a winner-takes-all political system was inappropriate in Africa and other developing parts of the world where there was no proper integration.

He cited the example of Egypt where the Islamic Brotherhood had won elections and used its influence to appoint its functionaries to almost every position only to have the West raising concerns about that later.

Prof. Bekoe observed that while the nation may not be ready for a proportional representation system as being advocated by a section of the Ghanaian society, it was imperative that the "the winner-takes-all syndrome is adequately addressed in a manner that would promote national unity and political inclusivity.

He said the ideal situation for instance was what pertained in Switzerland, a multi-ethnic, multilingual European country where political participation was highly inclusive.

"It is sad that in our case, every election is a nightmare. The fear and apprehension of losing elections is the cause of the current political situation," he said.

Adding his voice to the discussions, Mr Pianim said the election of metropolitan, municipal and district chief executives remained an alternative that would enhance inclusiveness in the country's governance system and also serve as a good training ground for young politicians.  

For Mr Mac Manu, the decision not to elect MMDCEs did not augur well for the country's democracy.

"The fact that you are able to elect presidents and parliamentarians does not mean you're getting it right. Ghana is not getting it it right. What is democracy if does not include the grassroots?" he asked.  

He said across Africa in countries including Uganda, Kenya, Nigeria, Bostwana, Tanzania and Benin, local government elections ensured that the people participated in electing their leaders.

Mr Agbesi, for his part, said the winner- takes- all system had created a lot of problems for the country and also led to a highly divided country.

He expressed regret that the Constitution Review Commission did not touch on the matter in its final report submitted to the government in December, 2011.

"We have to end this as soon as possible for this country to move forward," he added.

By Seth Bokpe/Daily Grahic/Ghana

Election Petition judgement day: SC restricts attendance to four groups

The Supreme Court has indicated that only accredited persons will be allowed attendance to the Court on the judgement day of the presidential election petition currently before it.

A statement signed by the judicial secretary, Justice Alex B. Poku-Acheampong, noted that attendance to the court on Thursday, August 29, 2013 had been restricted to only four groups of people.

The groups, the statement said were the two parties in the case, the Bar, the media and representatives of the security agencies.

According to the statement, "the decision has been taken to ensure that security at the court premises and inside the courtroom is not compromised in anyway."

The four groups have, therefore, been advised to contact the Office of the Director of Communications from midday of Tuesday, August 27, 2013 to Wednesday, August 28, 2013 for their accreditation.

It further added that all accreditation cards which were used during the previous sittings had been withdraw and were thus, considered no longer valid.

The statement further advised the general public to stay away from the premises of the court on the judgement day.

"With the exception of the identified groups of people who will be provided accreditation cards to enter the court, the general public is advised to follow proceedings from the Supreme Court through television and radio sets as has been the practice," the statement added.

It also directed party functionaries, former and current ministers of state, as well as parliamentarians who wished to attend proceedings to contact their party headquarters for accreditation.

The media was also advised to renew their accreditations by forwarding an official letter bearing the name of the reporter and or cameraman who have been assigned as well as their staff ID cards to the office of the Director of Communications of the Judicial Service.

Visitors to the Supreme Court have also been advised to note that seats in the court room would be numbered to correspond with the number on the accreditation cards and are therefore, requested to cross-check the number on their cards against their seat numbers.

Source: Graphic.com.gh/Ghana

NDC lauds NPP for going to court, calls for all-inclusive government

Ghana's democracy was given a boost yesterday when the National Chairman of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), Dr Kwabena Adjei, commended members of the opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP) for petitioning the Supreme Court over the 2012 presidential election results.

"It has strengthened our democracy,signalled to the world that Ghana is a unique country, educated our people on the electoral system and will lead to the sanitisation of the electoral system," he declared at a flag-raising ceremony to mark the 21st anniversary of the NPP at the party's headquarters in Accra yesterday.

 

Attendance

Present were the general secretaries of the NDC, the Convention People's Party (CPP) and the People's National Convention (PNC), Mr Johnson Asiedu-Nketiah, Mr Ivor Greenstreet and Mr Bernard Mornah, respectively.

Also in attendance were former President J.A. Kufuor, the Women's Organiser of the NDC, Ms Anita de Sousa, and two other persons who have been members of the Danquah-Busia-Dombo tradition since the formation of the United Gold Coast Convention in the 1940s, 94-year-old Madam Sophia Ayokor Klu and Mr Francis Tuhir, who is in his 80s.

 

Humour

Just before addressing the gathering, Dr Adjei, spotting an NPP muffler around his neck, turned to Dr Mahamudu Bawumia, the second petitioner and running mate of the NPP Flag bearer in the 2012 general election, to greet him and jokingly said, "My friend, you and I were not there", which drew applause from the audience.

He said the NDC also celebrated its 21st anniversary on June 10, 2013 but could not invite the NPP because "we were in the middle of the pink sheets", obviously meaning that both parties were at the Supreme Court on that day.

 

Winner-takes-all

Dr Adjei attributed the tense situation in the country to the winner-takes-all political environment and said from now onwards "let us share. This country belongs to all of us".

He  pledged that whichever way the Supreme Court verdict would go on August 29, 2013, nothing untoward would happen in Ghana because as politicians, "all of us have had lives in opposition and in government before".

When Mr Asiedu-Nketia took the floor to speak, he commended the NPP for the occasion and described the party as being very good in opposition.

He jokingly urged the NPP to stay out of power for a longer period because the party would best serve Ghana in that position.

 

Unity

Mr Asiedu-Nketia noted that Ghana could only unite when there was peace and urged all Ghanaians to forge ahead in harmony.

He appealed to all political leaders and their supporters to bear in mind that "no King will last forever" and that even if such a king stayed for long on the throne, the subjects would be fed up with him.

 

NPP

The National Chairman of the NPP, Mr Jake Otanka Obetsebi-Lamptey, urged  members of the party to use the occasion to take stock of the activities of the party in the last 21 years and build on the good ones.

He said the decision of the party to challenge the results of the presidential election was to raise the flag of Ghana and accelerate the pace of democracy.

According to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey, the existence of political parties was critical to Ghana's democracy, adding that  "the competition among political parties was a contest of ideas and the provision of alternative voices to others".

The flag bearer of the party in the 2012 elections, Nana  Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, assured the gathering that the party was committed to the ideals of the founding fathers.

He said the NPP would not relent in implementing policies bordering on such issues as free education to the secondary level, the rule of law and a free market economy.

In a friendly gesture, Nana Akufo-Addo asked Dr Adjei to extend his regards to "the first respondent, His Excellency the President of the Republic of Ghana, President John Dramani Mahama".

Source: Daily Graphic

Statement: Rethinking Ghana's winner-takes-all system - IEA

As part of its commitment to deepening and consolidating Ghana's constitutional democracy, The Institute of Economic Affairs - Ghana has commenced a Constitutional Review Series, within which to review the Report of the Constitutional Review Commission (CRC) vis-a-vis the Government White Paper.

The first in the Constitutional Review Series was held on the 21st of August 2013, under the theme, "Rethinking Ghana's Winner-Takes All System: What are the Alternatives beyond Proportional Representation?"

It will be re-called that the Constitutional Review Commission, in its Report, did not propose constitutional amendments regarding Ghana's Electoral System. There have however been calls by Ghanaians for a re-thinking of the "Winner-Takes-All" syndrome that characterises national elections. It has nonetheless been argued that the nation may not be ready for the alternative of Proportional Representation.

The first in the IEA's Constitutional Review Series therefore provided a platform for a discussion of the Winner-Takes-All syndrome and explored alternative solutions beyond Proportional Representation. The program was attended by over 80 representatives of Civil Society, Political Parties, Traditional Rulers, Clergy, Academia, Media, Members of Parliament, Ministers of State, and the Diplomatic Community. A presentation on the above theme was made by a senior lecturer at the GIMPA Law School. The ensuing discussion by participants explored the features of the "Winner-Takes-All" syndrome, its underlying cause and its effects.

Underlying Causes

Participants were of the opinion that the 1992 Constitution of Ghana was not the cause of the Winner-Takes-All syndrome and the dominance of the Executive over the other arms of Government. In their view, the 1992 Constitution provided adequate checks on the powers of the Executive by the Legislature and the Judiciary.

They agreed that the persistence of the Winner-Takes-All syndrome was due to a dysfunctional relationship between the Executive and the other arms of government, expected to keep the executive in check, particularly Parliament. They were of the view that changing the status quo and adopting Proportional Representation would not necessarily limit the excesses of the executive arm of government.

They expressed the view that the socio-cultural orientation of looking up to the Executive for the provision of basic needs and services without a formidable challenge by the constitutionally-mandated institutions had accounted for the Executive arm's dominance and the politics of exclusion.

Effects of the "Winner-takes-All' syndrome

• The Winner-Takes-All syndrome involves the capture of all echelons of political power and the control of all public resources by the winner of a national election. It typically involves a complete marginalization of opposition political forces from the governance process.

This tends to create high stakes during elections, leading to heightened tensions and risks of national insecurity. It undermines national cohesion and also has the effect of weakening a nation's democratic credentials.

• The Winner-takes-All system affords inordinately high levels of power to the Executive arm of government, rendering the other arms of government, expected to hold the executive to account, virtually dysfunctional.

• The anticipation of the above effects of losing national elections makes parties desperate to win national elections and where they lose an election, they have no incentive to accept the results of the election, leading to intense national instability.

Recommendations

Participants offered the following proposals for reform that placed various responsibilities on the Legislature, the Judiciary, civil society, and politicians as follows:

1. The Winner-Takes-All system must change. To this end, the Legislature must be assertive in playing its constitutionally-mandated role of keeping the Executive in check.

The Legislature must ensure that allocation of resources by the Executive is effected in an inclusive and transparent manner and that the approval of ministerial nominees for public appointments is carried out solely on merit and not partisan grounds.

2. The Judiciary must invoke and actively apply the power of judicial review granted it under the 1992 Constitution as a means of bridling excessive powers of the executive.

3. Citizens must apply to the judiciary for protection and seek redress at the Courts when they are removed from public offices based on partisan considerations.

4. There should be effective and truly decentralized local governance. This will ensure inclusivity and participation across the political divide in the governance process.

In this regard, Metropolitan, Municipal and District Chief Executives must be elected directly in order that parties that lose power at the national level may still have the opportunity of winning power at the local level and thereby participate in the governance of the country.

5. Politicians must change their attitude and psyche and embrace the democratic ideal of ensuring an all-inclusive government.

6. Civil Society must hold the winner of executive authority accountable to ensure that executive authority is not exercised for the benefit of members of one political grouping.

ISSUED IN ACCRA THIS 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2013.

SIGNED CONTACT: Dr. Ransford Gyampo

............................................ Research Fellow

Mrs Jean Mensa

Executive Director 

US issues alert on court verdict

• Govt says no cause for alarm

The American Embassy in Ghana is not out of place in cautioning its citizens to be wary of the political situation in Ghana, the deputy minister of the Interior, Mr James Agalga, has said.

"I don't think the American Embassy, in sending a word of caution to its citizens, is totally out of place because, as a country, we ourselves have sent warnings and cautions to the people many times not to overreact to the verdict.

"For instance, the Ghana Catholic Bishops Conference and some civil society organisations have called on Ghanaians not to over-celebrate or overreact after the declaration, so the Americans sending a word of caution to their citizens to be careful of what is likely to happen following the Supreme Court verdict on August 29, is not wrong," he said.

The deputy minister, who was reacting to a statement issued by the American Embassy ahead of the Supreme Court verdict, said, "As a ministry and a government, we have, time without number, assured Ghanaians that the security agencies are alert and taking measures so that after the declaration lives will be protected. Ghanaians should go about j their normal activities without fear or favour."

He said although it was within the right of the US Embassy to advise its citizens, there was no cause for alarm, as the security agencies were on top of issues.

Mr Agalga admitted that the fact that every Ghanaian was concerned and preaching peace was a clear indication that one could not rule our isolated cases of violence.

The US Embassy had, in a statement, warned about a potential increase in political tension and the possibility of isolated violence associated with the Supreme Court verdict on the 2012 presidential election pending before the court since December 28, 2013.

"US citizens in Ghana are reminded to maintain a high level of vigilance and to take appropriate steps to increase their security/safety awareness during this politically sensitive period. US citizens in Ghana should avoid the offices of political parties, Ghana's Supreme Court, the buildings of other institutions associated with the elections and all political rallies," it said.

"We recommend that US citizens in Ghana monitor the local news and avoid all demonstrations, as even those intended robe peaceful may suddenly turn violent" it said.

The statement from the US Embassy had inflamed passions, with critics of the embassy saying the statement had the potential to further heighten tension.

But the deputy minister said the statement was not something that should cause fear and panic.

He urged Ghanaians "to go about their normal activities without fear or favour, as nothing will happen. The security agencies are ready to deal with the situation".

Allaying the fears of Ghanaians concerning the statement, the Information Officer of the American Embassy, Ms. Jean Clarke, said the warning was not based on signals picked by the embassy pointing to violence but rather a routine message to its citizens.

 

"It is a routine process for us. If you remember, in December, we issued a similar statement but nothing happened. Even during the Kenyan elections this year, a similar caution was given to our citizens she said.

She said there were many US citizens in Ghana in one activity or another. Therefore, it was obligatory for the embassy to inform them about the security situation to enable them to adopt an appropriate security posture.

"We don't want Ghanaians to be alarmed. This is just routine," she added.

 

 

 

'Touchline' to Supreme Court; Police set 100-metre radius

The Police Administration has designated a 100 metres radius around the Supreme Court as a no-go area on the day the court will give its judgement in the election petition.

That, the police said, was part of security arrangements to ensure sanity on the premises of the Supreme Court on August 29, 2013, a day otherwise designated as "Ghana's judgement day".

The Director-General of Police Operations of the Ghana Police Service, Commissioner of Police (COP), Mr John Kudalor, said the security zone would be cordoned off but gave no details as to how accredited persons would gain access to the Supreme Court.

He was speaking in Accra last Friday when he met the youth wings of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and the New Patriotic Party (NPP) at the Police Headquarters.

He said the police were employing preventive and proactive measures to ensure that any disturbances were contained.

Mr Kudalor said everybody, irrespective of his or political affiliation would be dealt with according to the law if he or she was found to be breaching the peace in the country.

He said the police would not stand aloof for any misguided group of persons to plunge the country into chaos.

He said the police had undergone a lot of training in crowd and other management control in order to prevent the use of firearms to control crowds.

The National Youth Organiser of the NDC, Mr Ludwig Hlodze, urged the media to stop sensationalising issues and rather place premium on advancing the well-being of the nation.

"Whatever we do as a nation will come to nought if the media continue to sensationalise national issues," he cautioned.

He urged the youth to expose and shame politicians who would like to use them to cause violence and mayhem in the country.

A youth organiser of the NPP, Mr Emmanuel Attafuah-Danso, said the NPP had an unwavering belief in the rule of law, hence its decision to go to the Supreme Court to seek justice.

He said the meeting with the police had motivated the youth to seek more peace and development for the country.

By Abdul Aziz/Daily Graphic/Ghana

Ghana Election Petition Ruling, August 29

The Supreme Court yesterday quizzed the litigants in the ongoing 2012 presidential election petition to seek clarification on aspects of their voluminous legal addresses. It also confirmed Thursday, August 29, as the date to deliver its judgment.

 

The clarification, which was used to wind up seven months of hearing of the petition, was in respect of re-categorisation of some exhibits submitted to the court, explanation of 'preferred date set', definition of over voting, statutory consequences of electoral irregularities, and dire consequences without going through the Biometric Verification Device (BVD).

 

Others were on the principle of annulling election results, retroactive application of the law, and invalidation of the results and statutory consequences of electoral irregularity.

 

Philip Addison, lead counsel for the petitioners, set the ball rolling when Justice William Atuguba, the presiding Judge of the nine-member panel, wanted him to clarify how the petitioners re-categorised some of their exhibits submitted to the court.

 

He explained that the petitioners began with 11,842 polling stations set out in the further and better particulars, but deleted 704, reducing the number to 10,119 polling stations.

 

Mr. Addison said the criteria for including the pink sheets had been captured in the further and better particulars in the KPMG report and was used only once in their analysis.

 

Giving a breakdown of the polling stations used, he indicated that 7,999 unique pink sheets from the court registrar's set, 960 unique polling stations recovered from what the KPMG excluded, 804 pink sheets from the presiding judges' set, 60 remarks recovered from the presiding Judges set that were unclear to KPMG and 566 pink sheets used by the petitioners.

 

On over-voting, Mr. Addison said a polling station may move from over-voting category to no signature of the presiding officers category and that 83 pink sheets were deleted in the over-voting category.

When Justice Jones Dotse, a member of the panel, asked Mr. Addison what he meant by 'preferred data set', he cited pages in the petitioners' addresses which consisted of a cited pages of duplicate polling station codes.

 

He said that respondents explained that there were duplicate polling station codes because some were used for special voting while others were used to split large polling stations into A and B.

 

Justice Atuguba asked James Quarshie- Idun, counsel for the Electoral Commission (EC), about the statutory consequences of electoral irregularities that he alone identified in his address.

 

He read out portions of his address that related to an authority that a High Court hearing an election petition could uphold an election conducted in accordance to High Court rules but Justice Atuguba said his explanation was not acceptable and needed to be clarified.

 

But Mr. Quarshie-Idun insisted that a High Court was empowered to dismiss claims of irregularity if certain conditions were not met.

 

In an intervention, Justice Rose Owusu, a member of the panel said Constitutional Instrument (CI) 75 was the regulation made for presidential election and suggested that that should be the focus of his case.

 

Justice Atuguba disagreed with Mr. Quarshie-Idun when he said he did not think a C.I. could make modifications to an Act but said if the Act permitted it, then it was possible.

 

When it was the turn of Tony Lithur, counsel for President John Mahama, Justice Atuguba wanted to find out why he (Lithur) wrote in his address that failure to go through BVD did not go with any dire consequences.

 

He explained that the BVD was a process of capturing biometric data which involved a person's picture and the purpose was also to identify if a person was eligible and that once the process of registration was done, then his right to vote is activated.

 

Mr. Lithur added that even if a person's finger print could not be identified and his face could be identified then there is the discretionary power to allow him/her to vote and that finger print verification was not the only form of verification.

 

Mr. Lithur described as false the petitioners' assertion that since people's finger prints were not verified, then it meant people voted without the BVD.

 

Asked to explain retroactive application of the law and invalidation of the results which was sub-mitted in his address, Tsatsu Tsikata, counsel for the NDC, contended that Article 49 of the constitution should not in any stretch of imagination lead to the annulment of votes.

 

He said it was the duty for party agents and presiding officers to sign the pink sheets and if in the discharge of public duty they both fail to per-form their duties it did not mean votes must be annulled.

 

Mr. Tsikata submitted that there must be a frown on penalizing people retroactively, since presiding officers could not be penalized without a specific law mandating them to sign pink sheets and that the voter who had no role to play in the presiding officers' failure to uphold the law.

 

During interventions by some members of the bench about Mr. Tsikata's assertion, James Quarshie-Idun rose to draw the court's attention to regulations in C.I. 72 which indicated that the BVD must capture 10 finger prints and photo-graph.

 

When Mr. Quarshie-Idun drew the court's attention that a cancelled pink sheet found its way into the petitioners address, Justice Dotse questioned why he did not use his turn during the oral address to point out the anormaly, he could not answer but blamed it on the duties of a presiding officer at a polling station. Probing further if there was any entry for the presiding officer to sign before declaration, Mr Quarshie-Idun said they signed only after declaration of the results.

 

 Mr. Tsikata disagreed with Justice Atuguba when he (Atuguba) referred him to an assertion by Mr. Addison that there were no mix up in the petitioner's exhibits and insisted that the confusion had not been addressed. He said in 2120 polling stations. 1029 had the same exhibit numbers but different polling stations, so it  was difficult to know which polling station was been referred to and that the petitioners should have clarified the situation during the cross examination stage of hearing.

 

Judgment has been slated for August 29, 2013. The historic case led to a legal brainstorm for the past seven months. The 11-member legal team of the petitioners is being led by Philip Addison. Others are Ms.Gloria Akuffo, a former deputy Attorney General and Minister for Justice, Stephen Dapaah Addo, Egbert Fabille Jnr, Professor Ken Agyeman Attafah, Nana Asante Bediatuo, Alex Quaynor, Frank Davies, Kweku Asrifi and Godfred Yeboah Dame.

 

The legal team of President John Mahama, the first respondent is being represented by Tony Lithur and Dr. Basit Aziz Bamda. The EC, the second respondent is made up of James Quarshie-Idun, with assistance from Anthony Dabi, Stanley Amarteifio, Freda Bruce-Appiah and Stepanie Amarteifio.

 

The third respondent, the NDC, is being represented by Tsatsu Tsikata and Samuel Cudjoe. The petitioners, the presidential candidate for the New Patriotic Party (NPP) for the December 2012 elections, Nana Addo Dankwa Akuffo-Addo, his running mate, Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia and the chairman of the NPP Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey are challenging the results of the 2012 presidential election which the Electora Commision (EC) declared President John Mahama the winner.

 

They are contending that 'gross and widespread irregularities' took place in 11,916 polling stations. The petitioners are, therefore, calling for annulment of 4,670,504 votes cast in the 11.916 polling stations. But the respondents, President Mahama, the Electoral Commission and the National Democratic Congress(NDC) first, second and third respectively, have denied any wrong doing and are in view that the polls were free, fair and transparent and for that reason, the results were credible and accurate.

 

The nine-member panel of judges hearing the petition is presided over by Justice William Atuguba. Other members are Justice Julius Ansah, Mrs, Justice Sophia Adinyira, Ms. Justice Rose Owusu, Justice Jones Dotse, Justice Anim Yeboah, Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, Justice N.S Gbadegbe and Mrs. Justice Akoto-Bamfo. 

Source: Ghanaian Times