The politics of judicial review of elections in Ghana: Implications for judicial reforms and emerging electoral jurisprudence

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper explores the contentions surrounding the legal reasoning in the judicial review of Ghana’s 2012 presidential election petition and its electoral and legal implications. Due to the political nature of the electoral petition, the judiciary is dragged into the ‘live wire’ of electoral politics, which brings their credibility and legitimacy into question. This study argues that the adversarial nature of judicial review makes it more likely for defeated political actors to impugn political bias in the administration of electoral justice, instead of adhering to the higher constitutional principles of popular sovereignty and natural justice. Based on content analyses of the different principles and interpretive methods underpinning the adjudication of the election petition, it distils some implications for the direction of judicial reforms and the emerging electoral jurisprudence. The paper demonstrates that the excessive executive powers in the appointment of procedures of judges’ revealed major cracks in the practice of judicial review. In sum, this study makes an important theoretical and empirical contribution to the current debates on the role of constitutional courts in the consolidation of democratic governance in African states.