By: Felix Engsalige Nyaaba
Accra, Friday
31ST May, 2013.
Dr. Kwadwo Afari-Gyan, Chairman of
the Electoral Commission and returning officer of the 2012 presidential
election, yesterday began his evidence-in-chief in the presidential election
petition at the Supreme Court and exposed all the lies the petitioners have
been claiming of irregularities during the polls.
He led evidence on four categories
of irregularities as spelt out by the petitioners and rebutted each of the
allegations
For instance, Dr. Afarui Gyan took
the court through all the process leading to the election, during and after the
election and stated that it was not true for the star witness for the
petitioners, Dr Mahamadu Bawumia, to state that polling stations were
recognised by their serial numbers.
He explained that in his vast
experiences in the election process since 1992 where he acted as deputy
Chairman in charge of operation under the interim election commission in the
country, polling stations have always been recognised by their names and unique
codes, adding that serial numbers captured on results booklets which are also
known as the pink sheets.
An earlier attempt by lead counsel
for the petitioners, Mr. Philip Addison to stop Afari-Gyan from testifying
before the court, had back fired as the Supreme Court unanimously ruled
allowing the Election Chief Officer to give evidence in chief.
According to the counsel, Dr. Afari
-Gyan did not depose any affidavit filed by the second responded and that the
two deputy Chairmen, in the person of Mr. Amadu Sule and Mr. Sarfo Katanka, Chairman for Finance
/Administration and operation respectively,
who deposed the affidavit were present in court and there was no reason
given why they could not testified.
But the Supreme Court in its ruling
dismissed the objection raised by Addison, on the grounds that Dr. Afari-Gyan
is the Chairman of the second respondent which is a party in the case and also
the returning officer of the presidential election and therefore his testimony
to the court would be of great important.
With regards to the witness
experiences in the election system, he said he had worked with the electoral
commission since 1992 till date, and that throughout his duty as chairman of
the commission, he had never manipulated any results to favour one candidate or
the other.
He added that he had also worked for
other countries within and outside Africa continent and had also held several
position in election related civil organization including the UN, the Commonwealth,
AU and ECOWAS bodies.
According to the EC Chairman, he had
also helped to draw election procedures for some countries which today
democratic election process is being organized peacefully.
Polling Stations
Led by lead counsel for the second
respondent in the petition case, Mr. James Quashie-Idun, Dr Afari-Gyan, stated
that polling station names and codes were crafted such that anyone conversant
with elections would recognise polling stations by letters of the alphabet, except
I, for each of the 10 regions of the country.
He said, for example, that the code
number for the Brong Ahafo Region begins with G, while those for the Greater
Accra and the Ashanti regions began with C and F, respectively.
According to him, no polling agent,
as far as he was concerned, had received training on serial numbers as security
features, adding that it was surprising to hear from the petitioners witness
that the results booklet has serial numbers.
Dr. Afari-Gyan refuted allegations of
inadequate voter register provided to the petitioners, adding that the
registration which was biometrically compiled for the first time in the country
elections system was distributed to all political parties that were registered
to participate in the 2012 general elections.
Oversea voting
The Chairman of the Electoral
Commission in his evidence in chief to the court that, the EC registered
Ghanaian who were either working at the country embassies and High Commission,
Peacekeepers , Ghanaian students on going scholarship outside the country and
that after the compilation of the
complete register, all the political parties were given copies.
He apart from people who gave notice
of proxy voting due to their working schedules outside the country, no one
voted outside the country and that the allegation by the petitioners were
completely untrue.
“My Lords, no voting took place
outside the country, all elections were done in the country and there was no
single person who voted outside the country,” he stated.
According to him, the ministry of
Foreign Affairs brought a list of 2,000 Ghanaian living outside who were
eligible top vote, but when the officials of the EC went to those location
giving by the ministry, only 705 people were able to register.
He further refuted the allegation by the petitioners that copies of the
register was not giving them, adding that the register was made available to
all parties and the petitioners party was given a copy.
Special Voting.
On the issue of the petitioners star
witness allegation that special voting do not have code numbers, Dr
AfariGyan said the petitioners has
refused to study the election process, adding that the special voting has no unique characters
, except that the vote s are not counted on the same day.
He explained that the special voting
could be officially termed as early voting and that it is meant for people
whose work in the election day may take them outside their electoral areas
where they would not be able to votes, but the polling station is selected from
each constituency of the voter and that every constituency has at least one
special voting polling station.
The witness further indicated that
at the special voting day, all the political parties have their agents
represented and that there to ensure that nothing take places to breach the
process and the procedure of the election, adding that after the each special
voting, the results are kept in the ballot box uncounted sealed by the EC and
the parties and only open at the collation centre on the day of the normal
elections.
Ballot Paper.
The Chairman of the Electoral
Commission explained that, prior to the election day, the process involving all
the election material were represented by agents of the political parties and
that there was no where that the EC
carried on the production of any lection
material without the participating of the parties.
He said all political parties agents
were trained by the EC, about the process and the procedure, including the
printing and distributing of election materials including pink sheets and
ballot papers to the polling station.
Dr. Afari-Gyan said, apart from the ballot papers which have serial
numbers arranged in order, the rest of the materials especially pink sheets,
ballot boxes and Tempo-Envelops have no any serial numbers as been alleged by
the petitioners.
He said all parties has always have
their representation at all the activities and decision taking by the EC and
that there was no where in time did the EC took a decision or print materials
in the absence of the parties, adding that there was no legal requirement for
parties to be present at everything that the EC does but it was been done for
the purpose of transparency.
Voting Without Biometric Verification
On the petitioners’ allegations that
some voters were allowed to vote without undergoing biometric verification, Dr AfariGyan indicated that it was not true and further
pointed out that he was not aware that there was any formal complaint in that
regard.
According to him, the Colum on the
form where it was provided that persons who voted without verification was
later taking out after the parties have agreed that ,” No verification , No
vote and that the only people in the election process who were allowed to vote
without finger verification were persons
who have no fingers at all.
He said people who were to be voted
without their finger verification were already known by the machines as they were
captured during the registration as face only (FO) in the system.
No Signature on Pink Sheets
Witness admitted that the EC had
trained polling agents and presiding officers to sign pink sheets after the
declaration of results and then forward the sheets to the collation centre.
He stated, however, that nowhere had
a presiding officer lodged a formal complaint on why he/she had not signed a
pink sheet, adding that if a presiding officer failed to sign it could be
constituted as irregularity but it has no significant on the results since
there was no formal protest.
Poling Agent Duty
Touching on the allegation that
polling station agents are just mere observers, the EC boss stated that the
polling agents were part of the election process and have important role as the
election officers.
He said the poling agent’s duty was
to ensure that there was no impersonation and over voting and others, adding
that if the polling agent failed to perform his duty, he or she risk of facing
the crime of perjury.
Petitioners Meeting with the EC/
Peace Council
On the issue of the petitioners
first attempt to stop the declaration of the election, Dr Afari Gyan said the
election results was received from all the regional election headquaterter which were transmitted from the collation
centre .
According to him, at the collation
centre, all parties agent were present
and if they are not satisfied with the results tally to their candidates, they
raise objection dna ask for recount.
He said at no certain in time did
the EC receive complain from the collation centre or regional headquarters
of recount, adding that it was when the
EC starting receiving results at its
strong room that the petitioners agents present raised complain.
He said at the strong room, each
region has a fax machine and any time results from the region comes, the
parties representation look at them and when satisfied they sign and forward
same to him to sign.
He said it was during that time that Chairman
of the NPP wrote a letter complaining of irregularities in some polling
stations in some regions, but when they were confronted to bring evidence they
brought only two polling station pink sheets and that was insufficient evidence
to stop the EC from declaration the result.
Blank Spaces on Pink Sheets
Touching on allegations by Dr
Bawumia that blank spaces on pink sheets gave room for over-voting, Dr Afari
Gyan denied that assertion and said, he advised the officers to put zero to
avoid any manipulation.
Dr. AFari Gyan in his evidence
described the irregularities alleged by the petitioners as transpositional errors, adding that before one make
allegation of the irregularities the entire form of the election results must
be properly analyzed before a conclusion is draw of violation.
The Petition
The hearing of the substantive
petition, which has the Presidential candidate of the New Patriotic Party
(NPP), Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, his running mate, Dr Mahamadu Bawumia and
the Chairman of the NPP, Mr Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey, as petitioners began on
April 17, 2013.
The petitioners have alleged that
the December 7 and 8, 2012 presidential election was fraught with malpractices
of over-voting, non-signing of pink sheets by presiding officers or their
assistants, voting without biometric verification and duplicated serial numbers
of pink sheets.
However, President Mahama, the EC
and, the NDC have denied that any such irregularities occurred during the
election.
Dr.Afari Gyan returns to the court
on Monday June 3, to continue his evidence.
No comments:
Post a Comment