Prophecies during elections: Are there any limitations?

Democracy prevails when all citizens can participate directly in decision-making through the power of voting to select the government through free and fair elections or to take a decision in a referendum.  

In democratic societies such as ours, elections represent a fulcrum of governance, ensuring that leaders derive their authority from the will of the people.  

However, in our part of the world, religion and politics are seen to be bedfellows. You often find religious leaders prophesying victory for one political party or candidate. Candidates or their representatives also attend upon “Men of God” to seek such prophecies.

In the lead-up to the recently concluded December 7, 2024 Presidential and Parliamentary elections, prophets, Imams, priests and others once again made their voices heard, offering prophecies of victory for various candidates.

The above phenomenon has provoked this article, seeking to interrogate the legal limits that exist in the exercise of this religious freedom and opinions from pollsters. 

Freedom of religion, expression

Ghana's 1992 Constitution protects fundamental human rights, including freedom of religion and expression.

Article 21(1)(b) and (c) of the Ghanaian Constitution states that “All persons shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief, which shall include academic freedom; freedom to practise any religion and to manifest such practice.”

These provisions create a legal foundation for religious leaders and individuals to express their opinions and beliefs, including prophecies about political outcomes.

However, such freedoms are not absolute. Article 12(2) of the Constitution allows limitations on these rights as they are subject to respect for the rights and freedom of others and for the public interest.

This implies that while individuals and religious leaders are free to express their opinions and prophecies, the timing and manner of such pronouncements could be subject to legal scrutiny if they risk undermining electoral processes or inciting public disorder.

Prophecies during elections

Prophecies by influential religious leaders often predict election outcomes or political events, shaping public opinion and stirring emotions among supporters.

These predictions come with both advantages and disadvantages. The responsibility of selecting capable leaders lies with human decision-making and active participation.

There is no proof that religious leaders’ prophecies are directly from God and such opinions could be regarded as ‘mere opinions’ from mankind not God. 

Impact

Predictions of victory or defeat for a particular candidate may influence voter confidence, discourage participation, or escalate tensions among supporters of different political parties. This raises concerns about the potential for undue influence.

The Representation of the People Act, 1992 (PNDCL 284) emphasises the need for free and fair elections.

Any action—whether by political actors or religious figures—that compromises voters' ability to make independent decisions may contravene these laws.

The Electoral Commission of Ghana mandates that all political campaigns shall cease 24 hours before the elections and remain suspended throughout the voting period.

Untimely or inflammatory prophecies that go beyond the time frame for campaigning could amount to interference in the democratic process. 

Role, electoral commissions, courts

The Electoral Commission (EC) is mandated to ensure that elections are conducted in an atmosphere free from intimidation and undue influence (See section 35 of PNDC Law 284).

While the EC does not regulate religious activities, it could collaborate with institutions such as the National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE), National Media Commission or traditional councils to discourage the misuse of religious platforms for political ends during the electoral period.

Article 125 (1) of the 1992 Constitution provides that justice emanates from the people and shall be administered in the name of the Republic by the Judiciary which shall be independent and subject only to the Constitution.

The courts have a role in adjudicating disputes that arise from such prophecies. The Judiciary, which is guided by the principles of fairness and justice, will need to determine whether such prophecies violate electoral laws or constitutional provisions. 

Balancing freedom, responsibility

It is impractical to ban prophecies outright due to constitutional protections. There is the need to encourage integrity and accountability in the religious sphere.

Integrity becomes hollow when actions fail to align with words. It is better to separate religion from politics, economy, science and technology. This approach respects religious freedoms while promoting a rational, informed electorate.

Recommendation

A person cannot be convicted of a crime unless it is expressly created by a written statute nor can they be convicted under a penal law that operates retroactively (See Article 19 (5) and (11)).

In Tsatsu Tsikata v. The Republic [2006] 1 M.L.R.G. 120, the Supreme Court observed that Article 19(11) of the Constitution was intended to abolish so-called common law and customary law crimes not codified in statutory law.

Punishing someone for violating directives from the Electoral Commission would be unjust.

Hence, Parliament should enact a law explicitly criminalising campaigning during the prohibited period.

This would bring clarity and order to electoral practices and ensure that voters can make their decisions without undue influence.

Conclusion

Constitutional protections uphold the right to individual and religious beliefs. These freedoms must be exercised responsibly to ensure they do not compromise the integrity of the democratic process.

By doing so, we uphold the rule of law, strengthen democracy and respect the diverse beliefs of citizens.

The writer is a Legal Researcher,
BL Candidate, PhD, MPhil, LLB, & BSc.
E-mail: aappiahlarbi@gmail.com