TSATSU BITES BAWUMIA, AS HE CASTS DOUBTS OVER PETITIONERS HONESTY, CREDIBILITY

By Felix Engsalige Nyyaaba

Lead counsel for the National Democratic Congress (NDC), the third respondent in the ongoing election petition case, Mr. Tsatsu Tsiskata yesterday continued his cross examination on the chief witness and second petitioner and bombarded him with questions bordering on honesty and credibility of the petitioners who filed the petition seeking the Supreme Court to annul over 11,000 polling station result of the 2012 presidential election.

Counsel who was forced by the court to disembark on his surprises line of cross examination  following a continue objection from the petitioners counsel,  was not deterred and went further to quizzed the witness to admit to several errors  in their evidence brought before the court.

The supreme court  at the early hours of the yesterday sitting asked Mr. Tsikata, to discontinue his line of cross examination with surprises documents, mainly  pink sheets which do not fall within those of the pink sheets been challenged by the petitioners in the case.

However, in order to exposed and weaken the petitioners, Mr. Tsikata showed the witness several pink sheets that they attached as exhibits to confirm if they are indeed carried any form of irregularities as alleged in their petition.

According to counsel, the  after going through  all the pink sheets that have been labeled as exhibits and brought to the court, there were no  evidence indicating any form of malpractice in the case of over voting , non signature of  presiding officer and duplication of serial numbers.

He also told the court that, upon going through all the polling station results which results are been challenged it was evidence that the petitioners were conducting a selective case in court, for in his view similar errors have occurred in most polling station , especially where the first petitioner, Nana Akuffo Addo had more votes.

Mr. Tsikata argued that, the petitioners selectively focus their allegation on polling stations where the first respondent, president John Mahama had more votes than Nana  Akuffo Addo, and that by so doing they excluded similar mistake occurrence where they had more votes.

He said the over 11,000 polling station to which the petitioners want to restrict  the whole case  do not represent the real story of the 24,000 polling station out of the 26,02 polling station where the election was conducted.

“My Lords, our argument here are that, the petitioners have been very selective and their selectivity only focuses on polling stations where President John Mahama won,” he stated.

He added that the attempt to allow the witness identify the pink sheets from similar polling stations was not to indicate that the respondent want to bring a fresh case as argued by petitioners counsel, but to exposed their bad faith in their petition by making  their case on selective  bases.

He therefore invited the court to take notices that, the petitioners do not only failed to provide evidence of massive irregularities and malpractices, but have failed to convince the court to believe that they come in good faith when they actually brought the case on selective bases.

Cross Examination

Counsel, “Dr Bawumia, am going to present to you this pink sheet, you just have to identify it and tell the court what is on the face of the pink sheet.”

Addison;  “we object to that , I think counsel had made his mind not to follow what the court ruled here yesterday, you can not ask the witness to identify a document he has no knowledge about, my Lords we object to the tendering of these documents.”

Court:  “ counsel, I think we made it clear in our ruling yesterday that you cannot ask the witness question  on that documents, but you can ask that he identify and ask composite question, that was clear.

So  we cannot review our ruling  on this issues, please just refrain  your question which do not necessarily base on him answering the pink sheet  you ask that he identify, you can put the question  in a manner but direct to the answering on the pink sheet.”

Following the court intervention  over the new pink sheets from Asokwa and other places of the petitioners strong areas  which they selectively  failed to  add to their case, Mr Tsikata continue his cross examination.

He took Dr Bawumia through a marathon of questions bordering on their investigation leading to the filing of the petition, who  were those directed to carry the investigation on the lection irregularities, how the investigation was done and what  were the  criteria  for analysing the issues of over voting and among of other allegation.

Counsel: so Dr Bawumia, each claim of over voting, you did not identify them by yourself?

Witness: yes, I did not identify them alone, including those we are no longer relying on.

Counsel: who brief you what over voting is about/

Witness; the second respondent , the EC  Chairman at a press conference brief all stakeholders about what is over voting, he said over voting is when the total votes cast exceeding the total number of ballot papers issued to  a polling station.

Counsel: I suggest to you that idf there were over voting you could have protest at the polling station, did your agents protest over voting?

Witness,; no they did not , but that is why we are in court asking the court to annul polling station results where there was over voting, the over voting is on the face of the pink sheet.

Counsel: but there was no official protest at the polling station , no protest by your agents, they signed , look on the pink sheet, can you see your agent signature?

Witness: yes, they signed, they did not protest, but that is why we are in court.

Counsel: so how long did it take to detect the 24,000 polling station from the 26, 002 polling stations where you claimed there were irregularities?

Addison: My Lords, I think this question is not fair,  the question about the number of polling stations we said 24, 000 but we are now relying on only 11,138 polling station results.

Tsatsu: I think the question is fair   your lordships.

Court ; objection over ruled, counsel you may continue.

Counsel: your analysis was not base on the 24,000 polling ststion either , will you agree with me that the votes you sought to be annul  is not the actual ones,  you are seeking 55.6% of the first respondent votes to be annul and 28% of the first petitioner votes to also be annul?

Witness,: yes, but----hey heye---we are ---

Counsel: is ok, so you know that you have selectively seeking to annul votes from  where John Mahama  won significantly and exclude the vote from the first petitioner votes from where he also won massively?

Addison: we object to these questions, I think these are the reason why counsel was bringing those pink sheets from no where into this court.

Tsatsu: My Lords, I think these interruptions are prejudicial to my line of cross examination.

Justice Atuguba:  “But I think these are issues we have ruled over,  however, let us do  things that are  impersonal and professional  in this court, you must address your grievances to the bench.

However, from now onwards, if any of you at the bar uses words that are not civil, we would ask you to withdraw.

After the court warning to counsel, Mr. Tsikata continue with his cross examination on pink sheets that the petitioners used as exhibit which do not contain either of the categories of allegation brought to the court.

Counsel took the witness through several  exhibits which were either having the allegation of over voting, voting without biometric verification device and non signatures of presiding officers of which Dr Bawumia admitted and said they were no longer in their analysis.

When the witness was reminded that the exhibits was   attached to his affidavit and stamped by a commissioner of oath to the court and therefore he could not deny their validity, he said he has to cross check his data system t in other to confirm.

He denied some of the exhibits that have been attached in the affidavit, claiming that they were no longer relying on those pink sheets and that the court should not take account on them.

Dr. Bawumia has been in the witness box for 13 days now and has been subjected to thorough cross examination by counsel for the NDC, Mr. Tstaus Tsikata.

The case is being heard by nine member panel of the Supreme Court and chaired by Mr. Justice William Atuguba.

Proceedings continue today at 9: 30 am prompt.