By Felix Engsalige Nyaaba
Accra, Thursday, June 6, 2013
KPMG International, the private accounting firm that
was appointed by the Supreme Court to serve as referee and conduct an audit
counting into the presidential election petition case exhibits, was yesterday
ordered to conduct further counting on the president of the nine member panel judges,
Mr. Justice William Atuguba’s copies of the pink sheets to help in ascertaining
the true numbers of pink sheets the petitioners filed as exhibits at the court
registry.
The decision of the court orders followed an
agreement reached between the parties involved after the KPMG has provisionally
concluded its work on the first order dated May 9, 2013.
According to Mr. Justice William Atuguba, the grounds for the orders for further audit
counting on the presiding judge copies of the pink sheets was as a results of some development over the actual
numbers of pink sheets filed by the petitioners.
The parties on early Wednesday morning held a closed
door meeting with the nine judges over the issue and after the deliberating in
chambers, the court then came back in an open court and made the orders.
The court did not disclosed the total figure of the
pink sheets discovered by the KPMG so
far, but it was gathered that it has to do with the discrepancies of the total
exhibit filed at the registry of the court.
However before the court ruling, lead counsel for
the petitioners, Mr. Philip Addison raised concerns over the counting of the presiding
judge copies of the pink sheets.
According to him, the court earlier orders in
selecting the referee did not include that the presiding judge, Mr. Justice
William Atuguba copies should be equally counted.
The three respondents, on the other hand were also
requesting for two other members of the panel copies of the pink sheets should
be added in the counting in other to erase further doubt on the discrepancies
on the actual number of exhibits filed by the petitioner.
But the court in its orders rejected the respondents
request and ruled that the copies that were served on the president of the nine
panels should be audited by the referee and makes its final report to the
court.
It has been gathered that the KPMG has discovered
about 13,000 pink sheets as against the 11,842 pink sheets the petitioners’
said the have filed.
The modalities into the audit counting includes the
names of the polling stations, the code numbers and the exhibits numbers as
labeled by the petitioners and filed before the court.
KPMG
Role
The Supreme Court on May 9, 2013, issued an order
directed at KPMG, an international accounting firm to conduct an audit counting
into the pink sheets filed by the petitioners, following a legal request by Mr.
Tsatsu Tsikata, legal counsel for the National Democratic Congress (NDC).
The unanimous decision of the Supreme Court for KPMG
to conduct the audit counting aroused when Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, the star
witness and second petitioner in the presidential election petition case gave a
contradictory answer to a question posed by Mr. Tsikta during cross examination
with regards to the number of polling station pink sheets the petitioners attached
to their affidavits as exhibits before the court.
According to counsel, they have not receive the
11,842 exhibit as the petitioners have
stated in paragraph 44-67 in their affidavit that they have filed a total
number of 11,842 polling stations pink sheet as exhibits.
But 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 confirmatory answer from Bawumia, Mr.
Tsikata then requested the Supreme Court to order for an independent body to
conduct an audit counting onto the number of polling stations pink sheets filed
by the petitioners as exhibits.
The request was granted and the company per the
ruling was to conduct an unbiased and fair audit counting into the pink sheets
and transmit its finding results to the court through the registrar of the
Supreme Court for determination.
The court in that orders also granted liberty two
members each from the parties to be presence during the audit counting of the
exhibits at the registry of the court.
But few weeks into the counting, the respondents
came back to the court with the complainant that some pink sheets were smuggled
into the registers office and asked the court to vary its orders on the control
mechanism of the exhibits.
The request was denied and the respondents were
further directed to lodge the complaint with KPMG so it could add the issue in
its report to the court.
Afari-Gyan
Cross Examination
Dr. Kwadwo AfariI-Gyan, the chief returning officer
of the 2012 presidential election yesterday told the Supreme court during cross examination by lead counsel for first respondent, Mr. Tony Lithur that he will not change his mine in declaring
president John Mahama, as the legitimate president elect in the 2012 elections.
According to him, the president was elected based on
the results obtained from the 26,02 polling station nationwide and that apart from court orders which will stand
binding on the Electoral commission, he has no reason to rescind his mind in
declaring president John Mahama as winner of the 2012 presidential election.
Answering question on cross examination, the EC boss
said the declaration of the presidential election was based on the results
obtained from all the polling station that the election was conducted and it
was based on that polling station results that he declared the NDC presidential
candidate the winner of the elections.
He was cross examined by Mr. Tony Lithur and Mr.
Tsatsu Tsikata, lead counsels for President John Mahama and the National Democratic
Congress (NDC) respectively.
He told the court that the entire allegations by the
petitioners have no bases in annulling the presidential results and that the
court should dismiss the petition.
Dr Afari-Gyan was cross examined upon the evidence
he gave in chief to the court on the four category of allegatio0n of over
voting, voting without the use of biometric verification, duplication of pink
serial numbers and non signature of
presiding officers on pink sheets.
He further reaffirmed to the court that, there was
no record of complain by the petitioners on the entire allegation the sought
the court to annul the results.
Asked how the BVD machines was used, he said very
body pass through the process of verification and the verification machine
capture very voter data and that the
print out from the machine would help the court to determine people were
allowed to vote without the BVD or not.
The witness also told the court the absence of
signatures of the presiding officers on the pink sheets has no legal bases for
the results to be annulled, adding that so far the candidates’ agents signed to
certified that there was no problem; the EC cannot cancel results because the
presiding officer did not sign.
Dr Afari-Gyan said the 2012 general elections was the most free and fair
ever in the country election history since he work as Chairman of the Electoral
Commission and that the election was conducted without any evidence of
malpractices, adding that he do not understand what malpractices is in
election.
When asked by Tsatsu Tiskata , whether he would
conduct election on the 24,000 polling station should the court rule for rerun off, the EC
boss said the court ruling would be binding on the EC and it will abide by the court orders.
He however explained that if the 24,000 could
determine a winners, the election will have to be conducted in all the 26, 02
polling stations nationwide.
Paramount
Chief Voting Likeness
While under cross examination by the petitioners
counsel Philip Addison after the respondents counsel have closed their cross
examination, Dr. AfariGyan told the
court that on the issue of voting without verification machine, the presiding officer has the discretional
powers to allow some one who has pass
through the process but his or her finger could not be recognized by the machine to vote.
He however likened the situation to where a known paramount chief in any part of
the country who is known in the
community and said if such a personality go through the verification process
but his finger could not be recognize, the presiding officer can allow him to
cast his vote.
According to him, the verification is a process that
every voter must go through but not just finger printing, adding that the
petitioners have misunderstood the process and must bear responsibility of
their agents.
The case was adjourned till today at 10:00 am for
petitioners counsel to continue with cross examination.
No comments:
Post a Comment