Lessons from Ghana and Kenya on why presidential election petitions usually fail

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Authors

Azu, Miriam

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Juta Law

Abstract

Most presidential election disputes have been unsuccessful. Although the petitioners almost invariably have adduced evidence of non-compliance with electoral laws, so far the judiciary has hardly been persuaded that the alleged infractions against electoral laws have had any adverse impact on the validity of disputed presidential election results. The article examines the burden and standard of proof which must be discharged in presidential election disputes, and then, based on relevant national case law, it discusses the circumstances under which the courts would invalidate presidential elections results. It concludes with the observation that, although the Raila Odinga case confirms the reluctance of judges to overturn election results, the narrow win in the Nana Akufo-Addo case suggests that the era of unsuccessful presidential election petitions may be drawing to a close.

Description

This article is based on a dissertation submitted to the University of Pretoria in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa). (http://repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/43647)

Keywords

Elections, Voting, Biometrics, Petition, Electorate, Presidential election disputes, National case law

Sustainable Development Goals

Citation

M Azu ‘Lessons from Ghana and Kenya on why presidential election petitions usually fail’ (2015) 15 African Human Rights Law Journal 150-166 http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1996-2096/2015/v15n1a7.