![](https://i2.wp.com/ghanafeed.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Nii-Ayikoi-Otoo-751x516-1.jpg?resize=300%2C167&ssl=1)
Former Attorney General Ayikoi Otoo has expressed skepticism over the petition seeking the removal of Electoral Commission (EC) Chairperson Jean Mensa and her deputies, stating that the allegations leveled against them do not meet the threshold required for their dismissal. Speaking on Joy News’ PM Express on Monday, Otoo argued that the claims against the EC leadership are insufficiently substantiated and fail to justify their removal from office.
The petition, filed by Kwame Ofosu-Appiah, accuses the EC officials of constitutional violations, incompetence, and actions that have undermined public confidence in the electoral body. Among the allegations is the claim that the EC used its discretionary powers to disenfranchise residents of Santrokofi, Akpafu, Likpe, and Lolobi (SALL) during the 2020 parliamentary elections. However, Otoo dismissed these accusations as lacking the gravity needed to warrant such drastic action.
“I have looked at the petition, and I do not believe the issues raised meet the serious standards required to remove the EC Chairperson and her deputies. I don’t see any of these allegations as sufficiently weighty,” Otoo stated.
He further emphasized the importance of distinguishing between personal opinions expressed before assuming office and the official conduct of public officials while in office. Otoo noted that some of the claims against the EC officials stem from statements or actions made prior to their appointment, which he argued should not be held against them in their current roles.
“In your introduction, you mentioned that one of the deputies was alleged to have made certain statements while exercising his academic freedom. Young people often experiment with various ideas and behaviors, but they grow and learn from those experiences. It doesn’t mean they are forever barred from holding office or contributing to society,” Otoo explained.
Drawing a parallel to the judiciary, Otoo likened the situation to that of a judge who, before assuming office, may have expressed personal opinions. However, once sworn in, the judge is bound by their oath and the responsibilities of their role. “Before becoming a judge, he was a free individual. Now that he has taken the oath, he is bound by it, and his decisions are guided by his duty. Similarly, we should focus on what the EC officials have done since assuming office, not what they said or did before,” he added.
Otoo also stressed that the Chief Justice is the appropriate authority to determine whether the allegations in the petition meet the constitutional threshold for removal. “It is for the Chief Justice to assess whether these issues carry enough weight to justify removal. From my perspective, I do not see anything substantial enough to warrant such action,” he said.
On the specific issue of the disenfranchisement of SALL residents, Otoo acknowledged the frustration and disappointment felt by the affected communities. However, he cautioned against using isolated incidents to conclude that the EC leadership is incompetent or guilty of misconduct. “These are serious constitutional matters, and while people are entitled to seek redress, we must be careful not to rush to conclusions that could undermine our institutions,” he advised.
Otoo’s comments highlight the need for a measured and evidence-based approach to addressing grievances against public officials, particularly those in sensitive positions like the Electoral Commission. His remarks also underscore the importance of preserving the integrity of Ghana’s democratic institutions while ensuring accountability and transparency in governance.
As the petition awaits further scrutiny, the debate over the EC leadership’s conduct continues to spark discussions about the balance between accountability and the protection of institutional stability in Ghana’s democracy.
Source: GhanaFeed.Com