The Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) has ruled that it lacks the power to investigate the 2020 electoral violence which claimed eight lives because similar cases were already pending before the law courts.

In a report dated June 13, 2023, CHRAJ said Article 219 of the 1992 Constitution barred it from investigating matters which were pending before the courts, while its enabling law — the CHRAJ Act, 1993 (Act 456) — also did not clothe it with such powers.

The Commission came to the conclusion after conducting preliminary investigations to ascertain whether, indeed, it could act on a complaint filed by two Members of Parliament — Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa and Emmanuel Armah Kofi Buah — on August 26, 2021.

“The commission is of the considered view that its mandate to conduct any investigations into this complaint is clearly ousted by Article 219 (2) (a) of the 1992 Constitution, and Section 8(2) of Act 456,” CHRAJ said in the report.

Expedite court cases

The commission was, however, of the opinion that the violence, which affected four constituencies — Techiman South, Odododiodio, Ablekuma Central and Savelugu — was a blot on the democratic credentials of the country, adding that “it has, indeed, tarnished the reputation of Ghana as a beacon of democracy in Africa”.

It, therefore, made a recommendation to state institutions responsible for prosecution and adjudication of cases to expedite action on the electoral related violent cases that were before them to bring justice to the victims.

“There is the urgent need for all public officials and institutions charged with the responsibility of prosecuting and adjudicating on these matters that have been found by the commission to be pending before the courts to expedite action on bringing the trial of these cases to an end as soon as possible, especially as the next presidential and parliamentary elections are just a year and half away,” CHRAJ said in the June 2023 report.

Clarification

The Commissioner of CHRAJ, Joseph Akanjolenur Whittal, exclusively told the  Daily Graphic yesterday that the commission was a creature of the 1992 Constitution and an Act of Parliament, and, therefore, it could only act within the powers granted it by law.

“It is the considered view of the commission as a creature of the Constitution and statute that it can only exercise the mandate clearly and expressly conferred on it,” he said.

He explained that the rationale behind certain laws which prevented the commission from acting in certain cases was to also protect the sanctity of certain institutions also created by the Constitution.

“Ultimately, this commission must go to a court to enforce its decision. Now, if the matter is already pending before a court, and CHRAJ goes ahead to investigate, how will it be enforced if the outcome is different from the court’s decision,” he said.

On why CHRAJ made its report public more than a year after it was made, Mr Whittal explained that the report was released to the complainants and respondents last year but the commission decided to make it public to debunk the notion that it had failed to act on the complaint.

On August 26, 2021, Mr Ablakwa and Mr Buah filed a complaint, asking CHRAJ to investigate alleged unlawful conducts by officers of the Ghana Police Service and the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF), which the complainants said had resulted in the loss of the lives of eight persons and injured several others in the four constituencies.

The two legislators wanted CHRAJ to investigate, among other things, the activities of security operatives which they alleged had led to the death of the eight, and injury to others.

Other reliefs they sought were that “the investigations identify officials of the Ghana Police Service and the Ghana Armed Forces responsible for the unlawful acts which were the subject matter of the complaints and the persons under whose command and instructions they acted”; and that the investigations identify the role played by the Ministers for the

Interior and Defence in terms of the instructions and orders in relation to the conduct resulting in the complaint. The complainants also wanted CHRAJ to recommend to the Ghana Police Service and GAF to negotiate and agree on a compensation for the victims.

Findings

In its report, CHRAJ held that the same reliefs being sought by the complainants were subject matters of three different civil suits in relation to the violence at the Techiman South Constituency before the Wenchi High Court.

With regard to the violence at the Odododiodio and Ablekuma Central constituencies, CHRAJ made a finding that they were subject matters of prosecution by the Attorney-General (A-G) before the law courts.

Again, CHRAJ held that the violence at Savelugu was also a subject matter of criminal proceedings, with some of the cases already going through committal proceedings, with actual trial to commence at the High Court, while some were also at the A-G’s office for advice.