Three eminent Ghanaian elder statespersons have mounted a constitutional challenge at the Supreme Court, seeking to abolish the delegate-based systems used by major political parties to elect their presidential and parliamentary candidates.
The suit, filed on January 23, 2026, is brought by renowned cardiothoracic surgeon Prof. Kwabena Frimpong-Boateng, veteran medical practitioner Dr. Nyaho Nyaho-Tamakloe, and former Minister of State Dr. Christine Amoako-Nuamah. The plaintiffs argue that the prevailing internal electoral frameworks of political parties are unconstitutional, exclusionary, and inherently oligarchic.
Claim of Systemic Disenfranchisement
At the heart of the lawsuit is the claim that the New Patriotic Party (NPP), National Democratic Congress (NDC), and Convention People’s Party (CPP) have replaced mass participation with what the plaintiffs describe as a “restricted electoral college” system.
Under current party constitutions, voting rights in key internal elections are limited largely to party executives, office holders, and selected delegates—leaving the vast majority of card-bearing members without a vote.
The plaintiffs contend that this arrangement “severely disenfranchises” hundreds of thousands of party members in good standing and creates an unjustified “privileged voting class.”
In their statement of case, they argue that the delegate-based system violates multiple provisions of the 1992 Constitution, including the Preamble and Articles 1, 17, 33(5), 35(6)(d), 42, and 55(5).
“The delegate-based Electoral College system… which confines or restricts voting to specified executives… to the exclusion or material disenfranchisement of members in good standing of the party, contravenes the spirit and letter of the Constitution,” the writ states.
Call for Universal Member Suffrage
Led by activist-lawyer Oliver Barker-Vormawor, the plaintiffs are asking the Supreme Court to rule that the internal organisation of political parties must reflect the same democratic principles that govern national elections.
Such a declaration would compel parties to adopt universal suffrage for internal elections, allowing all registered members to vote for party leaders and candidates.
The suit specifically challenges:
-
Article 13 of the NPP Constitution, which limits presidential primaries to an electoral college;
-
Articles 43 and 44 of the NDC Constitution, which reinstate delegate-based voting over mass participation; and
-
Articles 53, 77, and 96 of the CPP Constitution, which establish a National Delegates Congress model.
Electoral Commission Joined as Defendant
The Electoral Commission (EC) has been named as the fourth defendant in the case. The plaintiffs accuse the Commission of failing to enforce Section 9(a) of the Political Parties Act, 2000 (Act 574), which requires political parties to demonstrate democratic internal structures as a condition for registration.
According to the suit, the EC has “failed, refused, or neglected” its statutory duty by allowing parties to operate delegate systems that undermine internal democracy.
If successful, the case could fundamentally reshape Ghana’s political party structures and significantly expand participation in internal party decision-making.
Supreme Court Writ: Key Reliefs Sought
In their action before the apex court, the plaintiffs are seeking a series of far-reaching constitutional and regulatory orders aimed at dismantling delegate-based internal party elections and enforcing universal participation.
Specifically, the reliefs sought include:
-
Striking down delegate-based electoral systems used by the NPP, NDC, and CPP on the grounds that they violate Article 55(5) of the 1992 Constitution, which requires political parties to conform to democratic principles.
-
An order compelling constitutional revisions by the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd defendants, mandating procedural reforms that guarantee equal and direct voting rights for all party members in internal elections.
-
A regulatory enforcement order against the Electoral Commission, directing it to actively vet and approve party constitutions to ensure compliance with democratic standards before registration or continued recognition.
-
A declaratory ruling on “political equality”, affirming that every registered party member—regardless of position, title, or office—must have an equal voice in the selection of party leaders and candidates.
Why the Case Matters Now
The plaintiffs argue that the timing of the lawsuit is constitutionally urgent. With the 2024 and 2026 election cycles shaping candidate pipelines and power transitions, they contend that delegate-based systems act as gatekeeping mechanisms that determine who ultimately gains access to public office.
According to the writ, by filtering candidates through a narrow and often elite group of insiders, political parties sever the essential chain of accountability between the electorate and the state.
“It would be constitutionally incoherent to demand equality and universality at the final election while tolerating exclusion and hierarchy at the decisive internal stage,” the plaintiffs argue.
The case, if upheld, could redefine internal party democracy in Ghana and significantly alter how political power is contested, distributed, and legitimised—long before voters cast their ballots at the national level.
Supreme Court Writ: Key Reliefs Sought
In their action before the apex court, the plaintiffs are seeking a series of far-reaching constitutional and regulatory orders aimed at dismantling delegate-based internal party elections and enforcing universal participation.
Specifically, the reliefs sought include:
-
Striking down delegate-based electoral systems used by the NPP, NDC, and CPP on the grounds that they violate Article 55(5) of the 1992 Constitution, which requires political parties to conform to democratic principles.
-
An order compelling constitutional revisions by the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd defendants, mandating procedural reforms that guarantee equal and direct voting rights for all party members in internal elections.
-
A regulatory enforcement order against the Electoral Commission, directing it to actively vet and approve party constitutions to ensure compliance with democratic standards before registration or continued recognition.
-
A declaratory ruling on “political equality”, affirming that every registered party member—regardless of position, title, or office—must have an equal voice in the selection of party leaders and candidates.
