By Felix Engsalige Nyaaba
The justice hearing the presidential election
petition case, yesterday for the last
time warned the lead counsel for
the petitioners , Mr. Philip Addison,
that a contempt case would be made against
him if he
continues to misconduct himself
before the court .
According to Mr. Justice William Atuguba, president
of the panel, the constant unprofessional misconduct by counsel for the
petitioners by using unpalatable language and insinuation to the bench of bias
towards him was highly unacceptable and if he fails to refrain from it the
court would have no option than to apply the rules of contempt.
The court further stated that Addison would also be
referred to the disciplinary committee of the legal council if the misconduct
continues unabated.
“I think, I have listening to all sides, but let me say
that, not every thing that the bench requires to comment, and even if it does,
it comes in general terms.
What counsel (Addison) is trying to say is that the
bench have not been fair to him, I do not take it lightly, this therefore means
that we would have to apply the rules of the court on both sides of the law, we
can cite you for contempt and also refer you to the legal council disciplinary
committee,” he stated.
The court warning arrived when lead counsel for the
petitioners, Mr. Philip Addison and the Mr. James Quashie-Idun, lead counsel
for the Electoral Commission locked horns, over the admissibility of some
documents from the EC through the witness, Dr Afari-Gyan.
Mr. Addison has shown some voters registers alleged
to be from Adaklu polling station s in the Volta region to prove a claim of
double registration.
The documents were objected to by counsel for the
EC, on the grounds that the authenticity of the registers were in doubt because
they were coming from the EC and also not the original hard copy of the
register that was given to the petitioners political party.
However, after failing on several attempts to
convince the judges as well as the respondents counsel over the documents, the
petitioners counsel raised the issue of unfairness towards him from the bench
which therefore attracted the judge’s angers.
Several attempts by members of the panel, including
Ms Justice Rose Owusu, justice Jones Dotse , justice Baffoe Bonnie and Justice
Vida Akoto Bamfo, with intervention to
let counsel understand the position of the respondents grounds of the objects
failed .
Mr. Addison went on and made comments to the effects
that the intervening by the judges with comments and explanation was an act of
unfairness toward him whenever he has to battle with the respondents.
But the court took exception and warned him, as well
as all the legal counsel in the case to be circumspect their conduct before the court, adding that
the court would not hesitate to sanction the law of contempt if those indiscipline behaviors continues to wear its ugly heads in the court.
The documents which Addison sought to tender were
polling station registers from Adaklu and Afadjeto constituencies which the
petitioners claimed recorded several double registration of voters.
According to the petitioners, the EC used double
registered voters in the 2012 election which was contrary to the evidence given
by Dr Afari-Gyan, the returning of the presidential election and witness for
the EC.
Dr Afari-Gyan refuted the allegation and told the
court that the petitioners were given both hard and soft copies, but pleaded
with the court to allow him to counter
check from the EC office and compares the two documents to authenticate the
them.
Parties
Battle over Variety of Pink Sheets.
Counsels from both sides of the election petition
case yesterday locked horns on each other with legal argument over the number
of pink sheets the petitioners filed and the type of exhibits served onto the
respondents.
The issues which was earlier debated on Tuesday
June11, was regenerated in court when petitioners counsel made attempt to
reintroduce similar pink sheets in court.
According to the respondents’, the exhibits the
petitioners sought to tender through the witness was completely different from
those that they were served with and therefore cannot be admitted through the
witness in court.
Addison
Lead counsel for the petitioners has shown the Dr
Afari-Gyan with some polling station
results booklets also known as pink sheets to identify and confirm, of over
voting.
According to counsel the figures on those pink
sheets do not confirm the explanation given by the EC witness that certain
numbers on the face of the pink sheets constituting over voting were entered in
errors.
Quashie-Idun
Counsel for the second respondent, the EC disagreed
to the tendering of the exhibits through the witness and objected to the questioning
of the witness on figures from those pink sheets.
He contended that, the exhibits the petitioners
sought the witness to identify and
confirm the figures was not known to them,
adding that the exhibits were not part of those served onto the EC and that the petitioners could ask the witness question on them.
He stated that the exhibits have different numbers
and different polling station names as well as their code numbers and that the
petitioners were introducing new exhibits.
Tony Lithur
Lead counsel for the first respondent, President
John Mahama also endorsed the EC counsel arguments and said upon careful
examining all the exhibits that the petitioners filed and served onto them, the
exhibits intended to show to Dr Afar-Gyan was different from what are with
them.
He argued that, apart from the different names of
polling station and codes numbers, most of the exhibits have not been filed at
the court.
He told the court until the KPMG report is made
public to ascertain the numbers and names of the exhibits the petitioners have
filed , it would be difficult for the respondents to agreed with the documents
be sought to tender through the witness after the petitioners have close their
case and was only doing cross examination.
Tsatsu
Tsikata
Mr. Tsikata, lead counsel for the National Democratic
Congress (NDC) also agreed with the first and second respondents counsel, on
the grounds that the petitioners were conducting pretentious litigation which
in his view is an attempt to mislead the court.
He said at all material time since the day Dr
Mahamudu Bawumia, the second petitioner was cross examined, it was made clear
to the petitioners that the respondents did not receive the number of exhibits
they claimed to have had filed before the court, adding that it was as a
results of their confirmation that KPMG was ordered to conduct audit counting
into the number of exhibits and their names that the petitioners filed.
Addison
But counsel for the petitioners dismissed the
respondents claims that they were serve with all the copies of the exhibits,
adding that the petitioners filed a total of 11,842 polling stations results
pink sheets and that if the respondents
have not receive all the copies it was up to them to approach the court
register for the remainder.
He argued that the failure of the respondents to
disclose the number of pink sheets the receive so the petitioners can serve
them with the rest was a contributing factor and prayed the court to dismiss
the respondents claims of not been serve with adequate exhibits.
Dr Afari-Gyan was been cross examined on his sixth
day by the petitioners counsel on wide ranges of allegation of double
registration, over voting , voting without biometric verification devices and
the non signature of polling station officers on the pink sheets.
He however denied the entire allegation, with the
examination that they were palpable errors committed by official of the EC who
were just recruited for the purpose of the lections.
The chief returning officer and Chairman of the
Electoral Commission though admitted the errors, adding that those errors could
not have affected the outcomes of the election and that they human errors which
any institution could experience.
Minor
voter
Dr Afari-Gyan on cross examination told the court
that, though the commission recorded minor voters during the mass registration
exercise, some of them were removed with the assistant of their parents and the
public.
He denied that minor were allowed to vote in the
2012 general elections, saying the EC
has no capacity to detect a voter age, unless the facility is giving to the
commission.
Answering question on the allegation that some
minors were allowed to vote in certain parts of the country, the EC boss said
there was no record of minor voting in the lection.
He explained to the court, after the general registration
exercise, the EC conducted a clean up
exercise on the register and during that time those found to be under age were
removed but those the EC cannot tell by the look of their face were compiled in
the register.
Dr AfariGyan also denied the allegation that the non
signature of poling station officer could amount to malpractices, saying that
the officer could be induced not to sign just as any persons who could be induce.
He noted that at the polling station the presiding
officer has discretional powers as to what constitute an invalid ballot paper and
that the allegation of ballot papers not stamps have no effects on the results.
The case has been adjourn till today for the
continuation of the cross examination by the petitioners counsel.
No comments:
Post a Comment