Connect with us

GENERAL

Election Petition: Supreme Court ruling was strange – Tsatsu Tsikata.

Published

on

Election Petition: Supreme Court ruling was strange - Tsatsu Tsikata. 1

 

 

Tsatsu Tsikata, lead counsel for Petitioner John Dramani Mahama in the 2020 Election Petition has argued that some aspects of the judgement by the Supreme Court shocked him.

Speaking on the KSM Show on Friday, March 12, Tsatsu Tsikata said: “The fact that the decision went against us, is part of the reality of court proceedings. In my own estimation, there are a number of aspects of the decision that are somewhat strange.”

“The court tried to set aside the evidence of two of the witnesses that were presented by John Mahama, namely Dr Michael Kpessah-Whyte and Robert Joseph [Rojo] Mettle-Nunoo. There was a description of that evidence as ‘fanciful tales’ which is quite extraordinary because the witnesses gave a completely truthful compelling account of the situation in the Electoral Commission premises on the day that the declaration was supposed to be made,” Tsikata said.

Tsikata noted that “Mr Mettle-Nunoo particularly gave a very vivid account of the interactions that he had with her [Chairperson of EC] and based on that interactions, he and Dr Kpasa-Whyte had to go on assignment; to go and brief their candidate based on what they were told by the chairperson. By the time they go to the candidate, she was already making a declaration.

He indicated that the Petitioners case was clear rather, the 1st Respondent failed to act “according to the law she herself was a signatory to; the Constitutional Instrument (CI).”

Tsikata observed that, the Supreme Court, “trying to dismiss the evidence of these people as a fanciful tale, is actually very very strange to anybody who is being objective about the matter.”

The Supreme Court in its unanimous judgment said of the two witnesses:

“As for the other two witnesses, that is Petitioner’s Witness PW2 and three – Dr Kpessa-Whyte and Robert Joseph Mettle-Nunoo – the little said about their testimonies relative to the issues at stake, the better. They recounted the fanciful tale of how the chairperson refused to heed their complaints on some irregularities they noticed on some of the collation forms which came from the regions.”

The Chief Justice Kwasi Anin-Yeboah added: “We describe this evidence as fanciful because, despite this alleged protest, they went ahead to verify and certify 13 of 16 regional collation sheets…..In fact, regarding the testimonies of PW2 and three, if their evidence is to be believed then they have to blame themselves for abandoning their post at the National Collation Centre at a time the verification and certification of the result were ongoing.”

Thus, they must accept the consequences if they left their post for reasons other than strictly observing the collation process.