Is it a case of political gerrymander. On the eve of Christmas last year the Electoral Commission announced its decision to create 30 new constituencies. This mandate, no doubt, has its basis in the 4th Republican constitution. The relevant section of the said constitution reads the EC shall review the division of Ghana into constituencies at intervals of not less than seven years or within twelve months after the publication of the enumeration figures after holding a census of the population, whichever is earlier, and may as a result alter the constituencies. [Article 47(1)].

Indeed, the creation of new constituencies was bound to come since the principal conditions above have been met. The last review was more than seven years ago and the last census took place more than 12 months ago.

There is hardly any national issue that is not looked at with political magnifying glasses. Some of us would have been shocked beyond measure if this announcement had passed without the characteristic hullabaloo.

The decision to create new constituencies was discussed with all political parties at the inter-party Advisory Committee level as far back as 2002. As at now, the NDC, PNC and CPP have raised objections to the EC's announcement. In the eyes of the above parties, they see political gerrymander at work. They maintain that the whole enterprise is skewed to favor the ruling NPP. May be their suspicion emanates from the fact that the Upper East and Volta regions would together loose four constituencies. And every body knows that the opposition has more seats in these areas. Other concerns include the fact that most political have already conducted their primaries. Logistical problems have also been cited.

For its part, the NPP seems to have no problem with the EC's announcement. Dan Botwe and B. J. DaRocha have pronouncements that suggest so.

On our part, we believe that all the decisions taken by the EC should be for the good of Ghanaians. None should tinker with the independence of the EC. Wish to state that those who disagree with the EC should seek interpretation at the Supreme Court.