The Supreme Court has ruled that expanding political party primaries to include all members in good standing will make internal elections less susceptible to vote buying by dispersing political power beyond a small group of delegates.
In a majority judgment delivered on July 29, 2026, Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie said that while money politics may not disappear entirely, the delegate system creates conditions that make targeted financial inducements easier and more effective.
The ruling was delivered in the case of Prof. Kwabena Frimpong-Boateng and two others v. the New Patriotic Party and four others, in which the Court, by a 5–2 majority, declared the delegate system used by political parties to select presidential and parliamentary candidates unconstitutional.
The Court ordered political parties to establish systems that allow every qualified member to vote directly in the selection of candidates within one year.
Addressing concerns that expanding the electorate could simply increase campaign spending without ending vote buying, the Chief Justice acknowledged that corruption could adapt to the new electoral framework.
“True, opening party primaries to every party member is no guarantee that money politics will disappear. Corruption is remarkably adaptable. It often changes its form rather than vanish altogether. Yet constitutional adjudication rarely offers perfect solutions,” he said.
He explained that the delegate system increases the value of individual votes because only a limited number of delegates determine who becomes a party’s candidate.
“Concentrating decisive electoral power in a relatively small body of delegates inevitably increases the value of each delegate’s vote. It creates a smaller market, a more identifiable electorate and, therefore, a more attractive environment for targeted inducements,” the judgment stated.
The Court recognised that organising nationwide primaries involving thousands of party members would present logistical and financial challenges.
However, it concluded that a larger voting base would make it significantly more difficult for candidates to influence election outcomes through a relatively small number of financial transactions.
“A broader electorate may increase campaign costs, but it also disperses political power among thousands of ordinary members, making it considerably more difficult for electoral outcomes to be shaped by a relatively small number of transactions,” the Chief Justice wrote.
The Court held that the Constitution favours broad political participation in the formation of political authority and that political parties must align their internal electoral processes with that democratic principle.
The case was brought by Prof. Kwabena Frimpong-Boateng, Dr Nyaho Nyaho-Tamakloe and Dr Christine Amoako-Nuamah, who argued that the delegate system disenfranchised ordinary party members.
The Court granted their reliefs and prohibited political parties from continuing to use delegate-based systems for the selection of presidential and parliamentary candidates.
It also ruled that the Electoral Commission has a responsibility to ensure that political parties organise their internal affairs in accordance with the Constitution.
The judgment, however, protects all decisions, appointments and actions previously taken under the delegate system, which remain valid despite the ruling.
The seven-member panel comprised Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, Justice Issifu Omoro Tanko Amadu, Justice Samuel Kwame Adibu-Asiedu, Justice Senyo Dzamefe, Justice Ernest Yao Gaewu and Justice George Kingsley Koomson, with Justices Samuel Kwame Adibu-Asiedu and Ernest Yao Gaewu dissenting.
