A Kumasi High Court has declared the cancellation of the nomination of Mr David Oduro by the Electoral Commission (EC) to contest the District Assembly election for the Tarkwa-Maakro electoral area in the Kumasi metropolis in July last year, null and void and consequently quashed that decision.

The court presided over by Mr Justice J.K. Abrahams, has therefore, ordered the EC to restore the nomination of Mr Oduro as a candidate of the Tarkwa-Maakro electoral area.

The court, however, did not award any cost.

The EC on July 19, 2002, cancelled the nomination of Mr Oduro on the grounds that he collected all the District Assembly Elections Notice of Polls meant to notify the electorate in the Tarkwa-Maakro electoral area.

According to the EC, Mr Oduro without any authority thumb-printed the column against his name and pasted them at public places within the electoral area.

Consequently, Mr Oduro and one Mr Kofi Oppong Boadi were arraigned before the then community tribunal on a charge of defacing official document.

Dissatisfied with the EC's decision, Mr Oduro filed an application for certiorari, praying the court to quash the EC's decision cancelling his nomination and candidature for the elections, which was held on July 30, 2002.

He also sought an order prohibiting the EC from conducting the elections for the Tarkwa-Maakro electoral area without his candidature of the electoral area.

In his ruling, Mr Justice Abrahams said even though section 38 of the Representation of the People Law 1992 (PNDC Law 284) under which the EC purported to act, provides that any person who defaces any notice or document exhibited under this law commits an offence and the punishment if proved is a fine of a term of imprisonment or both, it is not stated anywhere that the EC could cancel the nomination of any candidate.

Perhaps the law is silent on what should be done if a candidate in an election committed the offence, because the law did not anticipated a candidate committing such an offence and therefore no provision was made in the law for such eventuality.

What has been provided for, he said, is for the offender to be prosecuted after proper investigations under section 38 of PNDC Law 284 or for the candidates to file a petition after the elections under section 17 for the High Court to go into the matter in accordance with sub-section 18-23 of PNDC Law 284.

The court therefore, agreed with counsel for Mr Oduro that where the particular situation complained of, is not provided under the law, the EC has no power to arrogate to themselves the authority to decide on who should contest an election and that by cancelling the nomination of the applicant, the EC acted in excess of its jurisdiction.

In a related development, the then community tribunal on November 28, 2002, also acquitted and discharged Mr Oduro and Mr Boadi on a charge of defacing official documents.

The tribunal chaired by Mr S.K.A. Asiedu, held that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused persons beyond all reasonable doubt.