The Supreme Court has adjourned to the 28th day of January, 2026 to deliver its ruling on the certiorari application brought by Hon. Mathew Nyimdam against the decision of the Tamale High Court which anulled the parliamentary election results of Kpandai Constituency.

The Court was constituted by Pwamang (Presiding), Amadu Tanko, Kulendi, Asiedu and Kwoffie JJSC. Mr. Gary Nimako Marfo appeared for the Applicant with Mrs. Sika Abla Addo appearing for the 1st Respondent-Mr. Daniel Nsala Wakpal. Justice Amenuvor appeared for the electoral commission.

STAR OF THE MONTH - Professor Philip Ebow Bondzi-Simpson ESQ.

Yudah Brown, Influential Law Content Creator, Declares SRC Presidential Bid

ARGUMENTS

Out of time; error apparent on the record

Mr. Marfo argued in reliance in a plethora of cases that owing to the date of the gazette of the results which gazette is attached to the certiorari application and numbered Gazette No. 8123, the Tamale High Court ought to have ascertained if it had jurisdiction as the application was filed out of time.

In reliance on the words of Kulendi JSC in THE REPUBLIC v. HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION), ACCRA EX PARTE YVONNE AMPONSAH BROBBEY & GLADYS NKRUMAH-INTERESTED PARTY [TLP-SC-2023-56], Mr. Marfo argued that the error of the Tamale High Court to hear the petition of Mr. Wakpal out of 21-day period was an error on the face of the record which the Supreme Court ought not allow to stand.

Attack on Affidavit in Opposition; Ex Parte Ernest Yaw Kumi

Mr. Marfo attacked the contention of the Respondent, Mr. Wakpal that he filed a petition on 23rd December, 2025. He argued that the said petition which is attached to his affidavit in opposition was incurably bad as the filing precedes the statutory requirement of a petition 21-days after the date of gazette.

Mr. Marfo in reliance on Exhibit DNW4 of the Affidavit of Mr. Wakpal submitted that the Respondent has admitted that the date for gazette was on the 24th December, 2024.

Mr. Marfo in full conviction supplied the case of THE REPUBLIC v. THE HIGH COURT 3 KOFORIDUA, EX PARTE; ERNEST YAW KUMI, HON. HENRY BOAKYE YIADOM & ORS - INTERESTED PARTIES [TLP-SC-2025-55] that the Supreme Court had already established that the time for gazette of the Parliamentary elections was on the 24th day of December, 2024 and not the 6th of January, 2025.

SIKA ABLA ADDO ARGUMENTS

Mrs. Addo argued that the Applicant was cherry picking on the dates. She argued that there was a novel situation in the 2024 election as there were two gazettes by the Electoral Commission for election results. She submitted that there was a gazette on 24th December, 2024 and 6th January, 2025 gazette.

She argued, confidently, that the gazette on the 6th January replaces the 24th December, 2024 gazette. She thus argued that the Petitioner thus withdrew his petition filed on the 23rd December, 2024 and filed another which the Supreme Court has been called upon to quash.

Amadu questions

The Court in the voice of Amadu Tanko quizzed Mrs. Addo whose view of the appropriate date of election gazette should the Court be bound by, whether that of the a party or the Electoral Commission.

Mrs. Addo argued that there were issues with the depositions of the Electoral Commission and argued that the 6th January date should be that which the Court should hold as the date for gazette.

Kulendi on due diligence

Justice Kulendi asked Mrs. Addo why the Petitioner-Nsala Wakpal did not do his due diligence before filing his petition rather than rely on the statement of the Applicant at the High Court that the date of gazette was that of the 6th day of January, 2025.

Mrs Addo argued to disabuse the mind of the Court that the appropriate date for the gazette before the High Court was that of 6th January, 2025 and not 24th December, 2024. She argued that the Applicant-Mathew Nyimdam took part in the trial to its final conclusion to a qaushing of the election results and ought not be allowed to have the relief sought.

Asiedu JSC also asked if a search was made on the exact date of the gazette to which Mrs. Addo answerd that she did not sight a search upon taking over the brief.

Exceptions to Ex Parte Ernest Kumi?

Justice Kulendi questioned Mrs. Addo if the case of THE REPUBLIC v. THE HIGH COURT 3 KOFORIDUA, EX PARTE; ERNEST YAW KUMI, HON. HENRY BOAKYE YIADOM & ORS - INTERESTED PARTIES [TLP-SC-2025-55] in which the Supreme had heard arguments and pronounced on the right date of gazette for the 2024 elections had any exceptions.

Mrs. Addo argued that the decision and the reasoning in the case ought not be applied to the Kpandai Elections. She submitted that the Supreme should depart from the decision and reject the invitation thrown to it by the Application of Mr. Nyindam.

AMENUVOR TAKES HIS TURN

Mr. Amenuvor who indicated to the Court his intention not to make any arguments changed his mind upon urgings by the Bench. He submitted to the Court that he acquired the gazette publication himself and satisfied himself of the exact date of gazette.

He submitted to the Court that the date of gazette and that reported online have some differences which he brought to the attention of the Court. He therefore made reliance on his affidavit in opposition.

GARY QUERIED

Jsutice Pwamang queried Mr. Marfo if an Appeal was not the appropriate forum to attack the decision of the Tamale High Court to which he responded in the negative. He argued, relying on the seminal case of Mosi vrs. Bagyina that the Tamale High Court had no jurisdiction it purported to exercise and thus, the supervisory jurisdiction was a forum which was available to the Applicant to invoke for the reliefs he currently seeks from the Court.

ADJOURNED; EC STAYED

The Court adjourned to the 28th January, 2026 and stayed the Electoral Commission from any by-election until the ruling of the Court.