Presidential Election Petition: KPMG INT TO CONDUCT AUDIT OF PINK SHEET ---- AS REQUESTED BY TSATSU

By Felix Engsalige Nyaaba

By a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court yesterday ordered KPMG International, a private accounting firm to conduct an audit account of the over 11,000 presidential result booklets also known as pink sheets in the ongoing election petition case at the court.

The order which was granted upon the request of Mr. Tsatsu Tsikata, lead counsel for the National Democratic Congress (NDC), the third respondent in the case, further asked the KPMG International to conduct true and fair accounts on the pink sheets of all the polling stations comprising the names, code, serial numbers and the exhibits numbers as used by the petitioners in their affidavits.

The  Supreme Court  further ordered that KPMG , should  audit and find out as to whether the pink sheets if indeed filed, are all under the 24, categories of allegation of over voting, voting without the biometric verification device, same serial numbers and non signatures of presiding officers as alleged by petitioners.

Mr. Tsikata at the middle of his cross examination on Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, the star witness and second petitioner in the presidential election petition case asked the witness to confirm as to whether they have indeed filed a total number of 11,842  polling stations pink sheet as stated in paragraph 44-67 in their affidavit and served on the respondent.

The witness in answering the question affirmed that they have indeed filed a total of 11,842 polling stations pink sheets and has served on to the respondents with all the exhibits.

Following that affirmative answer from Bawumia, Mr. Tsikata therefore invited the Supreme Court to order for an independent body to conduct an audit counting on the number of polling stations pink sheets filed by the petitioners.

He contended that the number of pink sheets that have been used as exhibits and served onto them by the petitioners, were far less than the number the petitioners claimed in their affidavit.

But when the court asked Mr. Tsikata to disclose the number he has been served with, he told the court that he owed it as a right not to disclosed the number to the court  for his question was to discredit the petitioners’ credibility on the case before the court.

 The company, per the court ruling is to transmit its finding results to the court through the registrar of the Supreme Court for determination as requested by counsel for the third respondent.

According to the court, all parties in the case have the liberty to choose at most two persons to participate and observe the audit counting by KPMG International of all polling stations pink sheets of the 2012 presidential results filed by the petitioners at the registry of the court.

Mr Tsikata’s  cross examination on Bawumia, the chief witness of the three

petitioners was bordered on the duplication of serial numbers on the pink sheets in which the petitioners claimed constituted irregularities and therefore the court should annul results from those pink sheets.

Counsel took the witness through a heavy style of question asking the  witness to confirm or otherwise of the duplication of pink sheets to shore up figures to mislead the court into the believing that indeed  there were statutory violation, irregularities and malpractices in the 201`2 presidential  election results.

Following those tedious questions from the NDC astute legal practitioners, Dr Bawumia appeared overload with question than answers and therefore resorted to his famous answers, “we used those only ones in our analysis” as the reasons for the duplicated pink sheets of one polling stations which have been used for different exhibits.

Under the cross examination, Dr Bawumia admitted that there were errors in their labeling of the pink sheets, but denied that they were used twice in the data analysis’s

The controversial leading to the court order arises when the witness was asked to confirm a polling station results pink sheets which were used   with different exhibit number.

Counsel: can you confirm that those pink sheets you are holding are the same?

Witness: yes, my Lords, certain.

Counsel: can you mention the name of the polling station?

Witness: the name is Methodist Primary polling station.

Counsel: so you can confirm that they two exhibits with same polling station, is that correct?

Witness: yes, my lords, but----heeee,--

Counsel: wait; I am not finish, so you would agree with me that you used that polling station twice in your analysis?

Witness: that is not cor4ect my lords, we used them ones, my lords I think these are the miscellaneous, we do not key in the figures twice, if I may be permitted, I would show you.

Counsel: Dr. Bawumia, how many polling station result pink sheets have you filed and attached as exhibits?

Witness: we have filed 11,842 as the further and better particulars.

Counsel: so you can confirm that you have file all the 11,842 polling stations results pink sheets before this court?

Witness: yes, my Lords, we have, but I think the further and better particulars could be the best answer.

Addison; My  Lords , I do not know why counsel kept on asking same question on this number of polling stations pink sheets, we have filed all our exhibits and have them served on you, if you have not receive all, contact the registrar of the court.

But for us, we know we have filed all the 11,842 polling stations results pink sheets, if you don’t have them why do you wait up to this date, when you are in court cross examining a witness you are now requesting for the rest, I think counsel have denied his own right to the exhibits.

Tsatus; My Lords, the witness just confirmed to this court on oath that they have filed and supplied us with all the 11, 842 polling station results pink sheets as  they claimed in their paragraph 44-67 of their affidavit, but we do not have that figures.

My Lords, I think it is time that an independent audit should invite to audit the number of pink sheets that have been filed to this court.

After several back and forth argument over the number of pink sheets filed as exhibits before the court, the nine member panel of the Supreme Court Chaired by Mr. Justice William Atuguba , retired to chambers and invited the lead counsel members of the parties over the issue.

When the court finally reached a conclusion and resumed from chambers, it ruled that KPMG International accounting firm should be contacted to conduct audit account on the number of pink sheets before the court.

The case has been adjourned to May 13, for continuation of cross examination on Dr. Bawumia.