Ghana's New Region Creation Doctrine: The Jurisprudence of No Jurisdiction and the Faux Economics of Balkanisation

Abstract

Ghana recently created six new regions, amid controversy over who was entitled to vote in the region-creating referenda and its likely economic consequences. The Supreme Court declined jurisdiction to address the suffrage controversy, paving the way for voters in only the specified areas of the affected regions to vote for creating the regions. This article evaluates the Court's reasons for declining jurisdiction and the arguments made to support the creation of the regions. It concludes that there is merit in the claim that all voters in the affected regions should have participated in the referenda and raises substantial doubts about the arguments in favour of creating the regions. It also concludes that creating new regions gives the semblance of increased decentralisation but only results in deconcentration, hence more centralisation. The exercise continues the post-independence drift from regional power-sharing to fragmented powerless regions. Since the resulting fragmentation of the country provides no clear benefits but imposes certain costs, the article suggests either a constitutional amendment or statutory reforms to raise the bar for creating new regions.