Supreme Court dismisses Tsatsu Tsikata's review application on Amewu's Gazette
The Supreme Court said the application failed to meet the legal requirement.
Jonas Danquah 
A seven-member panel of the Supreme Court has dismissed the review application challenging the legitimacy of the Hohoe MP-elect, John Peter Amewu.
The court presided over by Justice Yaw Appau said the application filed by the residents of Santrokofi, Akpafu, Likpe, and Lolobi (SALL) fails to meet the legal requirement.
Justice Appau said the full judgement would be available by the close of today, March 30, 2021.
Mr Tsatsu Tsikata, who represented the residents of Santrokofi, Akpafu, Likpe and Lolobi (SALL), in his review application at the last sitting, contended that the apex court of the land fundamentally erred when it quashed the decision of the Ho High Court, which granted an injunction to the residents of the areas in dispute.
He contended that the Court breached the fundamental human rights of the residents when it quashed an order by the Ho High Court which had placed injunction on the EC from presenting Mr Amewu as MP-elect for Hohoe.
A Chief State Attorney, Mrs Grace Ewool who opposed the application on the other hand, argued that the review application raised no new and important issues to warrant the grant of the review application.
Background
The state through a Deputy Attorney General, Godfred Dame, filed a motion at the apex court to fight an injunction placed on Amewu by the Ho High Court.
The injunction was granted after some residents of Santrokofi, Akpafu, Likpe, and Lolobi (SALL) argued that the Electoral Commission’s failure to allow them to vote in the just-ended parliamentary elections amounted to a breach of their rights.
The injunction secured by the residents prevented the commission from gazetting Mr Amewu as the winner of the Hohoe parliamentary polls.
According to them, the creation of the Oti Region coupled with a recent Supreme Court decision and failure of the EC to create a constituency for them meant they did not vote for a parliamentary candidate in the just-ended election.
But the Attorney General jumped to the defence of the commission. It argued that the decision is not legally sound.
