The National Democratic Congress (NDC) has raised concerns over what it describes as bias and procedural flaws in the High Court judge's decision to order the Electoral Commission (EC) to re-collate election results in nine disputed constituencies.

The ruling, issued on December 20, followed a mandamus application filed by New Patriotic Party (NPP) parliamentary candidates, demanding the EC verify results in constituencies where alleged discrepancies had surfaced. The NPP argued that the irregularities necessitated a thorough examination to ensure transparency and credibility.

While some observers viewed the ruling as reinforcing the EC’s duty to ensure credible elections, the NDC has labeled it as legally contentious and flawed.

Although the EC has completed the re-collation in seven constituencies, the process for Dome/Kwabenya and Ablekuma North remains unfinished.

During proceedings on December 27, the NDC’s Director of Legal Affairs, Godwin Edudzi Tamakloe, argued that the High Court’s decision breached principles of natural justice. He claimed that the NDC had been denied a fair opportunity to present its case, which played a significant role in the outcome.

The NDC further accused the trial judge of bias and failing to meet essential procedural standards. Tamakloe pointed out a “non-jurisdictional legal error,” claiming the judge ignored Order 55 Rule 5(2) of CI 47, which mandates that parties with an interest in a mandamus application be notified and given a chance to respond.

These allegations of judicial misconduct and procedural oversights have added complexity to the ongoing legal battle, with the Supreme Court's forthcoming ruling expected to have far-reaching implications for the case.

“Our ground for this application is that the orders made by the High Court were made in breach of the applicant’s rights to be heard. The further ground is that the trial judge demonstrated apparent bias and partiality.

“There was a non-jurisdictional error of law by failing to exercise the court’s powers under Order 55 Rule 5 (2) of CI 47 to direct second to sixth interested parties to serve the mandamus application on the applicant who have interest in the dispute.”