By Daniel Bampoe
The Akwatia constituency in the Eastern Region has been plunged into mourning following the death of its Member of Parliament, Ernest Yaw Kumi, who passed away on Monday, July 7, 2025—exactly six months after he was officially sworn into office.
His death, which comes barely weeks after a landmark Supreme Court ruling vindicated his legitimacy as MP, has set in motion constitutional processes for a by-election within 60 days.
Ernest Kumi, a member of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), was at the centre of a protracted legal battle over the legitimacy of his election victory in the 2024 parliamentary elections.
After being initially declared winner and sworn into office on January 7, 2025, his tenure was immediately clouded by a legal challenge filed by the National Democratic Congress (NDC).
The party had contested the results and successfully sought a contempt ruling against Kumi in the Koforidua High Court.
However, the Supreme Court on June 11, 2025, overturned the High Court’s contempt conviction, ruling that the lower court had acted without jurisdiction.
The apex court declared that no parliamentary election petition can proceed unless the Electoral Commission (EC) has first published a formal gazette notification of the election results—a step that had been skipped in Kumi’s case.
The ruling established a significant constitutional precedent, essentially safeguarding future MPs from judicial proceedings based on prematurely filed election petitions.
With the legal cloud cleared, Kumi’s status as MP was formally affirmed by the Supreme Court.
However, his vindication was short-lived.
His death now brings both constitutional and administrative consequences.
Under Article 112(5) of the 1992 Constitution, the Clerk of Parliament is mandated to inform the Electoral Commission of the vacancy within seven days of becoming aware of it.
A by-election must then be held within 60 days of the occurrence of the vacancy—in this case, by early September 2025.
This by-election will not only fill the vacant Akwatia seat but also act as a test of the EC’s ability to conduct elections in line with the constitutional and procedural expectations clarified by the Supreme Court.
Legal experts note that the EC must now pay close attention to gazette notifications and jurisdictional timelines to avoid a repeat of the flaws that plagued Kumi’s original election.
Ernest Kumi’s passing also raises questions about his eligibility for parliamentary gratuities under Article 114 of the Constitution, which entitles former MPs or their estates to gratuity payments based on time served.
Though his term was contested, the Supreme Court’s validation of his position may secure full benefits for his family, but this remains legally untested.
Ongoing analysis of court documents shows that the case against Kumi highlighted broader issues within Ghana’s electoral legal framework.
Justice Emmanuel Senyo Amedahe, the High Court judge who originally presided over the contempt case in Koforidua, had proceeded without the EC’s gazetted confirmation of Ernest Kumi’s election—an error the Supreme Court labelled a “jurisdictional defect.”
Furthermore, the top court addressed breaches of natural justice, noting that Ernest Kumi was subjected to contempt proceedings despite ongoing challenges to the court’s authority.
