Contrary to suggestions for Mr Gabby Asare Otchere-Darko to retract his comments which described the Supreme Court judgement on the recently dismissed election petition as “farcical” and “corrupt”, the NPP stalwart has instead dared the Court.
Mr. Otchere-Darko’s comments which followed the Court’s judgement that dismissed the 2012 presidential election petition has been described widely as contemptuous – as it scandalises the judiciary.
Some legal analysts, including Kofi Abotsi, a law lecturer at the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA) has indicated although the panel of Judges that heard the petition challenging the legitimacy of President John Mahama has been dissolved, the Court as an institution could still charge individuals who scandalise it with contempt.
But speaking on Newsfile on Joy FM on Saturday September 7, the Executive Director of Danquah Institute, a pro-NPP policy think tank, sounded unperturbed.
Rather than apologise, Mr Otchere-Darko reaffirmed his position, noting that, “Yes, I said the decision was corrupt and I still think that the majority decision is a corrupt one.”
According to him, any critique of the Supreme Court verdict was not to challenge the validity of President Mahama’s election but for academic purposes.
“Whatever we are doing here, as far as I’m concerned is academic but it may also be useful for future decisions,” he said.
Mr Otchere-Darko further explained that his description of the ruling as corrupt was because the Supreme Court justices had downplayed the constitutional provision which mandated them to protect the constitution and make sure that the public adhered to its provision.
He declared: “I’ll go there [Supreme Court] and defend myself if they think that [his description of the judgement] is such a major issue for them”.
Mr Otchere-Darko Gabby Asare Otchere-Darko maintained that his comments were precisely about the judgement and not the Judges.
“Let them come and take me if that’s how they feel”, he said.
According to him, the worse the Supreme Court can do to him would be to throw him into jail or “say I’m no longer a Lawyer”, indicating he is ready – come what may.
Are they beyond criticisms? he asked, adding “I don’t think I’ve gone anywhere near the limit”.
“What is the big deal?” He enquired.