Supreme Court’s ‘one member, one vote’ ruling reflects vote-buying concerns – Mary Addah

Executive Director of Transparency International Ghana, Mary Awelana Addah, has criticised politicians who dismiss allegations of vote-buying as mere speculation, insisting that the practice is a well-known feature of Ghana’s political landscape and should no longer be treated as an issue of conjecture. Speaking on JoyNews’ Newsfile on Saturday, August 1, Ms Addah said the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling mandating a “one member, one vote” system for political party elections should be viewed against the backdrop of longstanding concerns over the influence of money in internal party contests. According to her, claims by some politicians that vote-buying has not been proven are detached from the realities witnessed by Ghanaians and civil society organisations.

“They also live in Ghana and they have seen, and when our politicians again say vote-buying is an issue of conjecture, I believe they are dreaming and they are not facing the reality we have seen,” she said. Her comments come days after the Supreme Court, in a 5–2 majority decision delivered on Wednesday, July 29, ruled that all registered members in good standing of political parties must be allowed to vote in the election of party leaders and candidates. The judgment effectively abolishes the long-standing delegate system employed by Ghana’s major political parties and introduces a “one member, one vote” model for internal party elections.

The decision, delivered by a seven-member panel, concludes a constitutional challenge that sparked intense legal and political debate over democratic participation within political parties. It is expected to significantly reshape the conduct of future presidential, parliamentary and executive primaries. Reflecting on the judgment, Ms Addah suggested that the Supreme Court’s decision was neither rushed nor taken without careful consideration of the country’s political realities.

“As for the promises, they are many and so I believe that is why this is very instructive, and I am sure that the justices didn’t come to this conclusion easily,” she said. She argued that the judges, like other Ghanaians, are familiar with the persistent allegations of vote-buying that have accompanied party primaries and internal political contests over the years. The Transparency International Ghana Executive Director said her organisation and other civil society groups have documented num…

Speaking on JoyNews’ Newsfile on Saturday, August 1, Ms Addah argued that the apex court’s 5–2 majority decision was a carefully considered judgment informed by the political realities facing the country. According to her, the justices would have been fully aware of the persistent concerns surrounding the influence of money in internal political party elections before reaching their conclusion. Her remarks follow Wednesday’s Supreme Court ruling that all registered members in good standing of political parties must be allowed to vote in the election of party leaders and parliamentary and presidential candidates.

The judgment effectively ends the long-standing delegate system employed by Ghana’s major political parties, replacing it with a broader “one member, one vote” model that is expected to reshape internal party democracy. The constitutional challenge, which was determined by a seven-member panel, had generated considerable legal and political debate over whether limiting voting rights to delegates was consistent with the Constitution. The ruling is expected to have significant implications for the conduct of future presidential, parliamentary and executive primaries, as political parties review their constitutions and electoral processes to comply with the court’s decision.