The New Patriotic Party (NPP) has dismissed attempts to associate its flagbearer, Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, with decisions taken on disputes arising from the party's ongoing constituency executive elections, insisting that the party's constitutionally mandated organs handle such matters.

The party stressed that decisions relating to election disputes, legal challenges and other internal matters are reached through established party structures after due deliberation and should not be portrayed as the personal decisions of any individual.

According to the NPP, Dr. Bawumia plays no role in adjudicating internal disputes or determining the outcome of cases before the party's National Council or National Executive Committee. It maintained that its decision-making processes are collective and guided by the party's constitution and internal rules.

The party further reaffirmed its commitment to respecting the rule of law, explaining that where court injunctions affect constituency elections, it suspends the electoral process until the legal issues have been resolved. It noted that this approach has been consistently applied in previous cases and reflects the party's commitment to due process.

Speaking on Citi FM on Saturday, July 11, Deputy General Secretary of the NPP, Haruna Mohammed, said it was wrong for people to drag the party's flagbearer into matters he does not determine.

"I've heard people dragging the name of the flag-bearer into this. And I want to use this medium to let everybody know that decisions of the party are not decisions of individuals. The flag-bearer is not a lawyer. He's not a judge. And he doesn't sit on any case," he said.

He added that the party had directed the suspension of elections in constituencies such as Assin South and Pungpongpu because of valid court injunctions.

Mr. Mohammed maintained that the NPP would continue to follow its constitutional processes and comply with lawful court orders in resolving disputes arising from its internal elections, stressing that the party's decisions are based on institutional procedures rather than the preferences of individual leaders.