Ghana's political and legal landscape has been significantly impacted by the Supreme Court's recent decision to overturn the annulment of the Kpandai parliamentary election results, a ruling that has sparked varied reactions and reignited constitutional debates regarding electoral justice and judicial independence. In a 4–1 majority decision, the apex court on January 28 quashed a High Court judgment that had previously annulled the 2024 parliamentary election in the Kpandai Constituency and ordered a rerun. This pivotal ruling effectively halted the planned rerun and affirmed the election of the New Patriotic Party's (NPP) candidate, Matthew Nyindam, as the duly elected Member of Parliament.

The core of the Supreme Court's decision centered on a jurisdictional error by the High Court. Mr. Nyindam had successfully challenged the High Court's ruling by invoking the Supreme Court’s supervisory jurisdiction, arguing that the election petition filed by the National Democratic Congress (NDC)'s candidate, Japheth Festus Gbede, was submitted outside the legally mandated 21-day period following the gazetting of the election results by the Electoral Commission (EC). Under Ghana’s electoral laws, any petition filed after this period is considered invalid. The High Court, however, had initially annulled the election citing irregularities in some polling stations and opted for a complete fresh poll, a remedy that drew criticism.

The ruling elicited strong reactions from key political observers and stakeholders. Dr. John Osae-Kwapong, a Democracy and Development Fellow at the Centre for Democratic Development (CDD-Ghana), described the Supreme Court's decision as both unexpected and reassuring. While surprised by the outcome, he expressed pleasure with the broader implications for electoral justice, noting progress in how Ghana handles parliamentary election disputes compared to past violent incidents like the Akwatia by-election. Dr. Kwapong had previously questioned the High Court's remedy, arguing that if legal infractions occur, the remedy should be limited to fixing the problematic areas rather than annulling an entire election.

Conversely, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) has vehemently rejected the Supreme Court's decision, signalling its intention to seek a review of the judgment. Rashid Tanko-Computer, the Deputy Director of Elections and IT for the NDC, explicitly questioned the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to determine the substance of election petition matters. He contended that Article 91(1) of the Constitution and PNDC Law 284 strictly empower only the High Court to adjudicate such petitions. Tanko-Computer argued that while the apex court has supervisory authority, it is unconstitutional for it to delve into the intricacies of an election petition. He reiterated the NDC's position, stating,