CASE BRIEF: Bilson v Rawlings & Another

CITATION: [1993–94] 2 GLR 413

Facts of the case:

In this case, after the nomination of Jerry John Rawlings, then Chairman of the PNDC, as the National Democratic Congress (NDC) presidential candidate for the 3 November 1992 presidential election, Emmanuel Bilson commenced an action challenging Rawlings’ eligibility to contest the election. Bilson alleged that Rawlings was a dual national, had failed to renounce his foreign citizenship and therefore owed allegiance to a country other than Ghana, making him disqualified under the Presidential Elections Law, 1992 (PNDCL 285). He also challenged the Interim National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) acceptance of Rawlings’ candidature.

Bilson sought declarations that Rawlings was disqualified from standing for or holding the office of President, an order removing Rawlings’ name from the list of presidential candidates, and orders restraining him from campaigning. Pending the determination of the substantive action, Bilson applied for an interim injunction to stop Rawlings from campaigning and to prevent INEC from including his name in the conduct of the election.

Legal Issue:

The chief legal issue was whether Rawlings was disqualified from contesting the presidential election under PNDCL 285.

To the Decision of the Court:

The High Court, presided over by Essilfie-Bondzie J, refused the application for an interim injunction. The court held that Bilson had failed to establish a sufficient prima facie case because the allegations of dual nationality and foreign allegiance were not supported by adequate particulars or evidence. The court also considered Rawlings’ statutory declaration accepted by INEC and the applicable legal protection enjoyed by the head of state.

How do you apply the principle?

The case emphasised that a claimant cannot succeed merely by alleging a fact. The allegation must be supported by sufficient evidence to satisfy the applicable burden of proof.