Executive Director of the West Africa Network for Peace Building, Emmanuel Bombande has stated that the call on civil society groups to psych up Ghanaians for the outcome of the Election Petition could generate unnecessary tension in the country.
He said the comments by the Executive Director of the Danquah Institute (DI), Gabby Otchere Darko "is a threat to peace".
The Executive Director of DI, a policy think tank claims the country is sitting on a time bomb because of what he says is the lack of education and delays in the ongoing election petition before the Supreme Court.
He said the 'negative peace' in the country is due to the decision by the New Patriotic Party (NPP) to challenge the outcome of the 2012 election in court – and that should the decision of the court go either way, members of the aggrieved party may take the law into their own hands.
Gabby Otchere Darko chided the civil society groups for their silence in the ongoing court case and also accused them of shirking their responsibility of preparing the minds of Ghanaians to accept the verdict of the court, which ever it goes.
But speaking on Asempa FM’s Ekosii Sen programme Tuesday, Emmanuel Bombande said Gabby’s anxiety is rather disrupting the judicial process.
According to him, if Ghanaians understand that the Election Petition will end successfully with a verdict, then there is no cause for alarm.
"If the interest is genuine peace; what everybody should be doing is refraining from interrupting the work of the courts and allow us to continue to engage in the process," he said.
The WANEP boss said everyone should understand that John Mahama is the president and is recognized internationally so if the court makes a contrary decision, "we will deal with it at that level".
He opined that Gabby’s allusion that the court decision could lead to violence has created an erroneous impression in the minds of the public that violence is the way to go if the verdict by the Supreme Court does not go the way they want.
Emmanuel Bombande called on all parties to allow the judicial process to work to its logical conclusion "rather than preempting, insinuating and playing subtle politics".