Ghana’s democratic and judicial systems are facing intense scrutiny following the procedural handling of the Kpandai parliamentary seat vacancy, which saw the Electoral Commission (EC) prepare for a rerun election despite ongoing appeals. Legal experts have strongly criticized the actions taken by the Clerk to Parliament and Parliament itself, arguing that these steps lacked legal authority and undermined the constitutional right to appeal, creating significant institutional confusion.

Former Deputy Attorney-General, Alfred Tuah-Yeboah, speaking on JoyNews’ Newsfile programme on Saturday, December 20, emphatically stated that the Clerk to Parliament acted without legal authority. He highlighted that notifying the EC of a vacancy while the High Court ruling, which annulled the 2024 election, was still under challenge at both the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, was procedurally flawed. Mr. Tuah-Yeboah stressed that a properly filed stay of execution legally suspends the effect of a judgment, making it improper for any administrative officer, including the Clerk, to act as if the matter is conclusively determined. He warned that such actions initiated a chain of unconstitutional steps, including preparations for a rerun, which threatened to undermine appellate court authority and create institutional disarray. “You cannot, by administrative action, defeat the right of appeal guaranteed under the Constitution,” he asserted, welcoming the Supreme Court’s intervention to halt the rerun processes as a vital move to restore legal order and urged state institutions to exercise restraint in election disputes to maintain public confidence.

Adding to this chorus of legal criticism, Professor of International Law and Human Rights at the University of Ghana School of Law, Kwadwo Appiagyei-Atua, also commented on the issue on the same Newsfile programme. Prof. Appiagyei-Atua argued that Parliament should have allowed the Kpandai Member of Parliament, Matthew Nyindam, to retain his seat while all legal appeals were being pursued. He contended that Parliament’s response failed to fully grasp the legal implications of pending appeals, noting that although the Speaker referred to a mandatory seven-day stay, the matter had progressed beyond the High Court to the Court of Appeal and subsequently the Supreme Court. According to Prof. Appiagyei-Atua, triggering the appellate process necessitates maintaining the status quo until the courts have exhausted the matter, an approach consistent with constitutional practice and respect for due process. He firmly stated, “I think that here the matter should have stayed, and the Member of Parliament, Matthew Nyindam, should have been allowed to stay in his seat.”

Further reinforcing these views, Lawyer and Senior Vice President of IMANI-Africa, Kofi Bentil, criticised Parliament’s decision to declare the Kpandai seat vacant as procedurally wrong given the pending appeal. He argued that Parliament ought to have exercised restraint once the affected MP lodged an appeal, as the filing of an appeal automatically places the High Court decision in abeyance until the appellate court makes a determination. “Once an appeal is filed, the effect of the judgment is suspended. Parliament should not have gone ahead to declare the seat vacant,” Bentil stated. He emphasized that the constitutional and legal framework governing election disputes demands respect for the hierarchy of courts and ongoing judicial processes, cautioning that enforcing a challenged decision risks legal and institutional confusion, thereby undermining the authority of appellate courts. Bentil warned that such premature decisions could inflame political tensions and erode public confidence in democratic institutions.

The Supreme Court has now intervened, suspending all preparations for the Kpandai parliamentary rerun, which the Electoral Commission had earlier slated for December 30, 2025. In a unanimous decision, the apex court directed the EC to halt every activity connected to the rerun, pending its full consideration of a legal challenge seeking to quash the High Court judgment that annulled the 2024 election. This suspension signals deep constitutional questions regarding jurisdiction, electoral rights, and timing. Legal experts view this order as a necessary step to prevent “procedural complications” should the higher court ultimately overturn the lower court’s ruling. The matter is currently adjourned to January 13, 2026, and the EC is legally restrained from proceeding until a final determination is issued. This situation prompts urgent questions about the collision of electoral timelines with legal challenges, the suspension of a constituency’s will during judicial deliberation, and the precedent this sets for Ghana’s democracy.