A parliamentary minority claims the Electoral Commission’s (EC) decision to abandon the use of indelible ink in public elections violates the 1992 Constitution.
During the parliamentary debate, South Dai MP Rockson Nelson Dafairmekpol said that according to the 1992 Constitution, the use of indelible ink is necessary for the smooth conduct of elections and its removal is a violation. Ta.
“The issue of non-use of indelible ink is against the law. Mr. Speaker, please refer to the House on Article 51 of the Constitution. The Election Commission shall, in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, establish rules for its effective implementation. shall be taken as a thing.
“Mr. Chairman, the controlling language there is “for the effective performance of functions under the Constitution or other law”… So Mr. Chairman, the Protocol is a document clearly outlined and determined by administrative legislation. You can’t come to Congress with a “protocol” without following protocol.
“The use of indelible ink is part of the regulations we have placed on equipment for the effective performance of election officials,” he said on Wednesday, December 20, 2023.
The lawmaker said the use of indelible ink distinguishes between individuals who have voted and those who have not yet voted, and suggested that removing the ink could create identification problems.
Dafeamkpor added that during elections, the EC chairperson should focus on formulating measures to improve polling rather than creating suspicion among voters.
“She has to do this in order to perform effectively. And to not put out any equipment that would impair the effective performance of that function,” he added.
On December 18, the EC announced that indelible ink will not be required for district-level elections and subsequent polls.
At a press conference ahead of district-level elections on December 19, EC Chairperson Jean Mensa said this is part of measures taken by the Commission to improve the electoral process and ensure a robust identity verification system. He said that.
But despite the EC’s confidence in the biometric system, identical twins were refused votes at a Methodist church polling station in Ga North constituency, Greater Accra. Her reason for doing so is that when she claimed her vote, her biometric system identified her as having already voted. It was her twin sister who voted for her.
Disclaimer: The views, comments, opinions, contributions and statements made by readers and contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policies of Multimedia Group Limited.