Constitutional Rights and Policy Strategy Advisor at Democracy Hub, Oliver Barker-Vormawor, has welcomed the Supreme Court's landmark decision mandating that all registered members in good standing of political parties be allowed to vote in the election of their leaders and candidates.

Mr Barker-Vormawor argues that concerns over cost should not derail efforts to deepen internal democracy.

Speaking on JoyNews' Newsfile programme on Saturday, August 1, Mr Barker-Vormawor maintained that, although the new electoral system may not completely eradicate the influence of money in politics, it represents a significant step towards creating a more inclusive and democratic political process.

"The mere fact that this may not entirely eliminate money in our politics doesn't mean we shouldn't try," he said.

His comments follow the Supreme Court's 5–2 majority decision, delivered on Wednesday, July 29, which declared that all registered members in good standing of political parties must be permitted to participate in the selection of party leaders and electoral candidates.

The judgement effectively dismantles Ghana's long-standing delegate system, replacing it with a "one member, one vote" framework that is expected to transform internal party elections across the country.

Since the ruling, questions have emerged about the financial implications of expanding internal party elections from a relatively small pool of delegates to the entire membership of political parties.

Addressing those concerns, Mr Barker-Vormawor argued that while organising nationwide primaries under the new system would undoubtedly require greater resources, the issue should be viewed within the broader context of public investment already made in Ghana's democratic institutions.

He noted that the state already shoulders significant responsibilities during political party primaries, particularly through the Electoral Commission's supervisory role.

"We have to admit to ourselves that there is already enough state funding that goes into our political parties' primaries," he said.

According to him, the Electoral Commission's involvement demonstrates that taxpayers already contribute to the administration of internal political contests.

"The mere presence of the Electoral Commission in supervising our elections—these are people that we pay," he observed.

Mr Barker-Vormawor argued that rather than focusing solely on the increased financial burden that could accompany the "one member, one vote" system, Ghana should engage in a broader policy discussion about how democratic processes ought to be funded.

He suggested that policymakers should carefully consider the extent to which the state should continue to support political parties in conducting internal elections as the new system takes effect.

"We have to have a holistic conversation about what is the extent of how the state picks up some of the bill as this goes forward," he stated.

He indicated that such discussions should balance the need for broader democratic participation with the practical realities of organising large-scale internal elections.

Mr Barker-Vormawor also challenged suggestions that the Supreme Court's ruling would impose an entirely new financial obligation on political parties.

According to him, it is inaccurate to suggest that Ghana's democratic system currently leaves parties to bear the full cost of organising their internal elections.

"But also importantly, it is not true that our democracy imposes any cost on our political parties at all," he said.