Good morning, outstanding participants of the clicking, participants of the New Patriotic Party, and fellow Ghanaians.

Today marks three hundred and sixty five days and two days since Ghanaians forged their votes on December 7, 2024. We accumulate right here now not in party, however in profound alarm, to show a brazen and sustained attack on our democracy. I’m speaking a few vicious assault at the will of the folk and a stunning perversion of justice.

Two weeks in the past, on November 24, 2025, the Tamale High Court delivered a judgment that is little short of a constitutional abomination. A judgment so fallacious, so essentially reckless, that it threatens to dismantle the very basis of electoral justice in Ghana. A judgment that unlawfully nullified the Kpandai parliamentary election and ordered a rerun.

This judgment isn’t simply unsuitable. It is catastrophically bad. It is a monument to judicial recklessness. It is a impressive perversion. And if allowed to face, it’s going to unharness a chaos that can devour our democracy.

Let me be completely transparent from the outset. The New Patriotic Party respects the judiciary. But appreciate does now not imply cowardly silence when injustice screams from the rooftops. Respect does now not call for we meekly settle for a verdict that suffocates the legislation, contemptuously ignores the Constitution, and obscenely rewards violence with commercial space.

Today, we are saying sufficient. Today, we sound the alarm to wake each Ghanaian who cherishes democracy. Today, we claim our fearless resistance to this bad precedent.

THIS JUDGMENT IS AN UNMITIGATED LEGAL DISASTER

This judgment isn’t just fallacious. It is jurisprudentially bankrupt. It is a wholesale bloodbath of established felony ideas.

Section 20 of PNDCL 284 calls for 3 cumulative parts sooner than an election will also be voided: there will have to be non‑compliance with the Act or rules; that non‑compliance will have to imply the election was once now not performed according to the rules laid down by way of legislation; and the non‑compliance will have to have affected the results of the election.

The courtroom quoted this legislation. It recited the check. And then it dedicated an act of judicial fraud. It totally deserted the mathematics.

Consider the next plain numbers. Our Member of Parliament gained by way of a decisive margin of three,734 votes. The petitioner’s personal proof conceded disputed votes amounted to simply over 500.

Five hundred votes can’t conceivably overturn a margin of three,734. This is number one college mathematics. Yet, this pass judgement on overtly voided all of the election. How? By merely ignoring the “affected the result” requirement. The courtroom leaped recklessly from “there were irregularities” to “void the election.”

This isn’t the legislation. This isn’t justice.

Our election guide is specific: the place confirmed irregularities may now not most likely alternate the end result, the election will have to stand. The Supreme Court affirmed this in Enos as opposed to Electoral Commission—an election isn’t to be invalidated the place the end result obviously displays the bulk will.

This pass judgement on arrogantly discarded that sacred idea. This pass judgement on spat on binding precedent. This is judicial vandalism.

REGULATION 48 WAS DELIBERATELY IGNORED

The judgment pompously publicizes the petitioner’s absence from the relocated collation centre a deadly breach of herbal justice. But here’s the actual outrage that exposes this judgment as a sham: the courtroom intentionally, systematically omitted Regulation 48(2) of C.I. 127.

Let me state the legislation obviously. Regulation 48(2) states, unambiguously, that the non-attendance of applicants or brokers does now not invalidate acts lawfully achieved by way of the returning officer.

This is black-letter legislation. It exists for an important reason why: to forestall a candidate’s planned absence from turning into a weapon to void elections. The Electoral Commission’s witness affirmed this underneath cross-examination. Yet, this pass judgement on scandalously omitted it, permitting a normal idea to overtly trump an specific statutory provision.

This isn’t interpretation. This is judicial regulation. This is dictatorship from the bench.

THE BURDEN OF PROOF WAS CYNICALLY MANIPULATED

Observe the courtroom’s cynical double usual. It refused to seek out the petitioner led the vandalism that pressured the EC to relocate the collation centre, claiming there was once inadequate proof. It declared it will now not speculate.

But then, miraculously, when assessing whether or not irregularities affected the end result, hypothesis turned into appropriate. Vague, unsubstantiated assertions have been deemed enough.

The petitioner produced no credible selection tally. He referred to as no brokers from the disputed polling stations. He by no means demonstrated how 500 votes may overturn a three,734-vote lead.

Yet, this pass judgement on granted essentially the most drastic aid imaginable—voiding all of the election, disenfranchising hundreds, and rewarding the petitioner for his evidentiary failure.

In many stunning tactics, this can be a gruesome perversion of the load of evidence. It is a vintage case of brazen judicial malpractice.

PROPORTIONALITY WAS GROSSLY ABANDONED

Let us now read about the courtroom’s maximum consequential failure: its reckless abandonment of the constitutional responsibility to behave proportionately.

Section 19 of PNDCL 284 provides the High Court best 3 tightly framed possible choices: cancel the election, seat some other candidate, or push aside the petition. This isn’t an arbitrary menu. It is a sacred, restricted grant of energy. Because those possible choices without delay contact the Article 42 proper of each citizen to vote and to be counted, the courtroom is constitutionally certain—by way of Articles 23 and 296—to make use of that energy cautiously, moderately, and in a fashion that preserves the citizens’ actual selection anywhere the legislation makes it imaginable.

Our jurisprudence is unequivocal on how this responsibility will have to function. In Enos v Electoral Commission, the Court discovered the returning officer had breached the legislation. Yet, as a substitute of voiding all of the ballot, it used phase 19(b) to claim the petitioner duly elected, emphasizing that an entire election must now not be invalidated if the end result nonetheless displays the bulk will. This idea was once increased to the easiest degree within the 2013 Presidential Election Petition. The Supreme Court, adopting the Medhurst v Lough check, held that confirmed non-compliance is not going to justify voiding a ballot if the election was once “really and in substance” performed underneath the legislation and the end result was once now not, and may now not somewhat be intended to had been, affected. This is the settled doctrine of “substantial compliance”: elections are to be upheld the place breaches don’t overturn the folk’s selection.

Measured in contrast unbroken line of authority, the Kpandai judgment is starkly, dangerously out of step.

The courtroom itself authorised that many defects have been mere administrative mistakes—clerical lapses which may be addressed thru scrutiny or re-collation underneath the legislation. The petitioner’s personal case at the start mirrored this truth; he sought focused aid in best 41 polling stations, now not the wholesale annihilation of the constituency’s selection. The proof was once transparent: each unmarried Form 8A existed. The outcome was once gazetted. The uncooked fabrics to establish the actual will of the folk have been all provide and to be had.

Despite this, the courtroom leapt immediately to the most harsh of the 3 phase 19 results: a complete constituency-wide rerun. Its justification? That some collation fabrics have been destroyed.

But the judgment supplies no convincing reason the lack of the ones fabrics made it not possible to reconstruct the lawful majority from the present Form 8As. It provides no justification for why narrower treatments—a scrutiny, a re-tabulation, or at maximum a restricted rerun—have been insufficient and even thought to be. It fails to squarely solution the central query that Section 20 and our Supreme Court call for: Did the confirmed irregularities if truth be told display that the declared winner didn’t protected nearly all of lawful votes?

This is the core, unforgivable flaw. Where our case legislation insists on proportionate, vote-preserving treatments, this judgment defaults to nuclear aid. Where precedent instructions warning to appreciate the sovereign will, this courtroom exercised caprice. It didn’t use phase 19 within the cautious, constitution-compliant approach our jurisprudence calls for. It acted now not as a mother or father of constitutional rights, however as an agent in their destruction.

This isn’t a lawful judicial order. It is a deadly constitutional dereliction. Put otherwise, this isn’t justice. This is judicial brutality in opposition to the sovereign will of the folk.

THE MOST DANGEROUS PRECEDENT: REWARDING VIOLENCE

Now we arrive on the maximum outrageous, essentially the most terrifying a part of this abomination.

It was once the violent, legal acts of the petitioner’s supporters that pressured the relocation of the collation. They vandalized the centre. They destroyed fabrics. They created terror.

And now, this pass judgement on publicizes that since the petitioner was once now not notified of the brand new venue—a venue made essential by way of his personal supporters’ violence—all of the election will have to be voided.

Do you comprehend the perversity? Do you notice the catastrophic precedent?

There is an historical, sacred felony idea: an evildoer will have to by no means get pleasure from his evil. This judgment violates that idea totally. It rewards violence. It incentivizes chaos.

The message is chilling: if you’re shedding an election, create chaos. Destroy fabrics. Then run to courtroom and declare your rights have been violated.

If this stands, it’s going to break our democracy. It will flip each election right into a battleground. It will make thuggery winning.

This isn’t legislation. This is the demise of democracy.

We categorically reject this monstrous idea. We name at the appellate courts of this land to uproot this poison sooner than it infects our whole jurisprudence.

OUR UNYIELDING LEGAL RESPONSE AND PLEDGE TO KPANDAI

Let this be heard by way of all: our condemnation of this judicial abomination is matched best by way of our decisive, unified, and lawful motion. The New Patriotic Party stands as one cast rock in the back of our Member of Parliament for Kpandai, the Honorable Matthew Nyindam. His struggle is our struggle. His reason is the reason for each member and supporter of this nice celebration.

With the entire authority, assets, and overall backing of all of the NPP, Hon. Nyindam has taken the next instant and bold felony movements:

1. First, he has filed a keep of execution in opposition to the orders of this bogus judgment, halting any illegitimate rerun in its tracks.
2. Second, he has filed a formidable understand of enchantment to the Court of Appeal, respectfully praying for the whole overturning of this felony travesty.
3. And 3rd, spotting the grave constitutional harm inflicted, he has initiated an software for certiorari on the Supreme Court, respectfully calling at the easiest courtroom of the land to quash this perverse judgment and repair constitutional order.

We are deploying the entire drive of our felony arsenal throughout the framework of the legislation. Our guns are the Constitution, precedent, and an unshakeable dedication to justice.

To the resilient folks of Kpandai, we ship this message without delay:

We see your obviously expressed will, written within the indelible ink of three,734 votes. We listen your sovereign voice, which this judgment attempted to silence. Do now not lose center. The New Patriotic Party has now not deserted you. We have now not retreated. We are with you, totally and unfailingly.

We will stroll each step of this felony adventure with you. We will struggle in each courtroom, at each hour, with each useful resource at our command, to protect the mandate you freely gave. Your commercial space was once professional. Your selection was once simply. And we will be able to now not leisure till that selection is vindicated and your rightful Member of Parliament is restored.

This is our sacred pledge to you.

PART OF A SINISTER, CALCULATED AGENDA

Ladies and gents, this catastrophic judgment didn’t occur in isolation. It is a part of a planned trend. It is a thread in a sinister, calculated time table by way of the National Democratic Congress to make use of captured state establishments to silence opposition, suppress dissent, and cling Ghana’s democracy hostage.

Look on the info. Since assuming energy, the NDC has waged a continuing attack on democratic norms.

In Ablekuma North, we witnessed the legal annexation of our seat—a sunlight theft. State-sponsored thuggery marred the partial rerun. Our stalwarts, together with the prestigious Hon. Hawa Koomson, have been savagely crushed. The perpetrators won an insignificant Court fantastic. We selected peace and balance, and didn’t escalate.

In Akwatia, votes have been purchased brazenly, shamelessly, and systematically. And allow us to by no means overlook Sofo Azorka’s chilling danger to get rid of our Minority Leader—a reckless incitement nonetheless unanswered for in courtroom.

And this attack isn’t confined to our courtrooms. We see it now within the very halls of Parliament, the folk’s space. We see the machinations to intimidate our Members of Parliament and suppress their voices thru a bent and autocratic misuse of the foundations of process—a transparent breach of each the spirit and the letter of the Constitution of Ghana.

We know they’ve made our brave Minority Leader their high goal, searching for to silence essentially the most robust voice maintaining this govt to account. But let this caution echo in the course of the corridors of Parliament: we within the NPP is not going to permit their evil plots to achieve any method.

We could have our say in that House. We will divulge their fraud, their corruption, and their abuse of energy with relentless readability. We will use each professional device inside parliamentary apply to verify the voice of the folk, as represented by way of their elected Members, isn’t stifled by way of the tyranny of the bulk. Attempting to mute the Minority is an assault on democracy itself, and we will face up to it totally.

Yet even then, we selected peace. We exercised most restraint. We voiced our profound considerations and moved on.

But the NDC will have to by no means mistake our dedication to peace for weak point. They will have to by no means confuse our restraint for give up.

Now, they convey this outrageous Kpandai judgment. Now they threaten a showdown. Now they’ve the audacity to argue our lawfully elected candidate must now not sit down in Parliament.

This isn’t democracy. This is dictatorship masquerading as legislation.

The NPP places the NDC on corporation understand: we will be able to now not stand idly by way of whilst you break our establishments. We might not be silent whilst you pervert justice. We is not going to help you criminally annex seats you’ll want to now not win on the poll field.

CATASTROPHIC MISGOVERNANCE

And even because the NDC schemes to entrench itself, governance collapses.

Our Senior High School scholars have began failing at report charges. Their futures are in jeopardy, and there is not any achievement.

‘GoldBod’ and others sponsor the destruction of our water our bodies thru galamsey. Our rivers die, our forests vanish, and state establishments glance away.

One million tonnes of native rice rot whilst farmers weep. Insecurity rises. Ghanaians now not really feel secure in their very own nation.

This isn’t governance. This is catastrophic failure on an epic scale. This isn’t the Ghana we passed over to the NDC.

OUR UNSHAKEABLE COMMITMENT

Let me state obviously the place we stand.

The NPP is dedicated to constitutionalism, the rule of thumb of legislation, and accountable opposition. We reject violence.

But dedication does now not make us doormats. Constitutionalism does now not imply accepting lawlessness from the ones in energy. The rule of legislation applies to all—together with the federal government, judges, and the president.

We had been affected person. We had been restrained. We have prioritized peace. But our endurance has limits.

If the NDC continues in this trail of institutional seize and democratic subversion, they’re going to discover a other NPP—a celebration able to protect democracy with each lawful device at its disposal.

We promise now not violence, however resistance. Powerful, democratic, constitutional resistance. Resistance that can shake the rules in their captured establishments.

URGENT CALL TO ACTION

To the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court: The Kpandai judgment is essentially, catastrophically fallacious. It misapplies the legislation, ignores law, manipulates proof, abandons proportionality, and rewards violence. These don’t seem to be minor mistakes; they’re defects that strike on the center of electoral justice.

We respectfully urge you to set this bad judgment apart. Restore the mandate the folk of Kpandai overwhelmingly gave. Uproot this vicious precedent.

To President Mahama and the NDC: We see what you might be doing. Every scheme. Every plot. We won’t ever be silent. We won’t ever give up. I Respect the Constitution. Focus on governing. Stop shooting establishments. Stop annexing seats. Stop rewarding violence. The individuals are observing. History is observing.

To the media and folks of Ghana: Stay vigilant. Your democracy is underneath critical danger. Speak up. Stand corporation. Do now not let this nation slip again into authoritarian rule.

To our participants and supporters: Stay sturdy. Stay non violent. Stay able. The struggle for Ghana’s democracy isn’t over. It has simply begun. And we will be able to win.

CONCLUSION

One yr and sooner or later in the past, the folk of Kpandai voted freely. They selected their Member of Parliament by way of a crushing margin of three,734 votes.

That vote is sacred. That voice is sovereign.

A fallacious judgment can’t silence it. A captured judiciary can’t overturn it. Violence can’t be rewarded. Thuggery can’t triumph.

The New Patriotic Party stands lately because the fierce defender of that vote, that voice, and Ghana’s democracy.

We will pursue lawful manner to abort this travesty. We will struggle. We will give protection to this Constitution. We won’t ever give up. We won’t ever surrender on Ghana.

May God bless the New Patriotic Party.

May God bless our cherished Ghana.
And might God protect our democracy in opposition to all enemies.

DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by way of Readers and Contributors in this platform don’t essentially constitute the perspectives or coverage of Multimedia Group Limited.

DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by way of Readers and Contributors in this platform don’t essentially constitute the perspectives or coverage of Multimedia Group Limited.