Saturday, 8 June 2013

Presidential Election Petiton Hearing LAWYERS WARNED AGAINST MISINTERPRETING COURT PROCEEDINGS TO PUBLIC --AS AFAR-GYAN REMAINS IN THE BOX



By Felix Engsalige Nyaaba
Accra, Friday June7, 2013
The Supreme Court yesterday for the second time in the ongoing election petition case sent a stiff warning to lawyers in the case, especially their spokespersons to desist from the act of   giving wrongful interpretation of issues that happened during court proceedings.
According to the nine members panel of the Supreme Court, some lawyers who are not part of the substantive legal team leading the case in the court, often go out the court room and gives contr4ary views on issues that happened in the court, adding the act of the those lawyers is dangerous to the legal profession and that the perpetrators of those unethical activities should put a stop to it.
Mr. Justice Jones Victor Dotse , a member of the nine panel who raised the issue said,  upon watching  a news paper review program on one of the television station in the country on Thursday morning, he heard  lawyer Abraham Amaliba, a member of the legal communication team of the National Democratic Congress(NDC)  giving contrary view to  issues  happened in the court chambers on Wednesday May  5, 2013, and expressed his dissatisfactory  over the matter.
He said while contributing his comments on matters that happened in the court with regards to the court orders for KPMG to count the presiding judges copies of the pink sheets, the NDC lawyer made a comment which he, Justice Dotse felt to be untrue and contrary to the issues agreed upon between the parties in chambers.
He however expressed grave concern over lawyers’ comments on matters before the court, adding that the misinterpretation of court proceedings to the general public by lawyers should seize.
Justice Dotse said the act is degrading the fabric of the legal profession and that lawyers who are parties in a case should desist from it for it is unethical.
 “Today we heard one lawyer, Mr. Abraham Amaliba on TV commenting on the issue of KPMG which was not accurate of what happened in chambers, the parties agreed on issues that necessitated for KPMG to conduct audit counting on the president of the panel copies of the pink sheets, but counsel was saying some different from what took place in chambers.
I think the court would not longer deal leniency with any lawyers who make wrongful comments on issues in court or gives wrongful information to the public with regards to the conduct of this case,” he warned.
Mr. Justice William Atuguba, president of the panel also added that, the legal profession is one of the important profession of which members must uphold the ethics, adding that those involved in such comments should put a stop to it.
According to him, in any democratic dispensation, the stability of the society depends largely on the legal profession and how the legal system operates, saying the legal profession is an enviable profession of which members must commit themselves to the principles as it is the foundation of which they live upon.
 “I think the legal profession is a very powerful profession, very important and has important duty, so let us keep that, it our duty to preserve and protect the importance of the legal profession,” justice Atuguba intimated.
 Mr. Tsatsu Tsikata, lead counsel for the National Democratic Congress, said the issue was not limited to the comments on the TV, but was across all legal professional, especially those involved in the election petition case.
According to him, some legal counsel who are parties in the case are equally culpable of the wrong act  as they often  give misinterpretation  of issues that occurred in the court room to the media, adding it was becoming a canker which the court must jealously protect by condemning it across board.
“My Lords, the issue is very important, some legal counsel in this case who grossly made comments in the media after court proceeding should equally condemned, everybody must be condemned, it is not best,” he stated.
Mr. James Qashie-Idun, lead counsel for the Electoral Commission said he appreciate the sentiments expressed by the court and added that lawyers ought to be circumspect on issues been discussed in the media.
Cross Examination
Dr Kwadwo Afari-Gyan, the returning officer of the 2012 presidential election yesterday told the Supreme Court during cross examination that, as election administrator of the country, he owed it’s a duty to ensure that no Ghanaian was disenfranchised in any election held in the country.
 According to him, the irregularities that the petitioners relied on to make their case was purely administrative errors of which the commission take responsibility to ensure that those mistake do not repeat in subsequent election.
Answering oppressive question from the lead counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Philip Addison, the EC boss said the mistake as they occurred on the results booklet which also known as pink sheet were palpable mistake by election officers who were recruited for the purpose of the election, but added that those mistake have no grounds to warrant cancellation or nullification of the results.
On the allegation that the petitioners’ party was not giving the complete voter register which was used in the election, Dr Afario-Gyan said all political parties that participated in the 2012 presidential and parliamentary election were all given copies of the complete voter register.
 He denied severally that over voting did occurred during election, adding that the figure that the petitioners quoted as over voting were all entered in errors and that there was no bases for the results to be annul on such grounds.
He also told the court that the registration of Ghanaians outside to vote was done in consonance of the legal obligation on the EC and that there was nothing illegal in registering Ghanaians who live and worked in the country foreign embassies’ and other international organization.
 He further explained that the double registration recorded in the oversea registers was done in errors because the technical men who conducted the exercise failed to edit the registers before capturing the data base into the complete registers, adding that upon that no one voted twice during the elections.
While under cross examination, the EC Chairman  reiterated that over voting could only  occurred in a situation where the total number of the vote cast in the ballot box exceed the total number of persons registered and legible to vote.
He denied the allegation that the EC deliberately declared wrong votes in favour of President John Mahama, adding that the results were declared based on the total number of vote collated from the 26,02 polling stations nationwide .
The cross examination   by the petitioners witnessed heated legal argument between the respondents counsels over some exhibits which the petitioners counsel sought to tender through the witness.
The petitioners were tendering some pink sheets which bared different exhibit numbers to that of those with the respondents and they raised concerns and asked the court to take judicial notice to the discrepancies on the matter.
According to Mr. Tsikata, lead counsel for the NDC, the discrepancies on the exhibits numbers by the petitioner course great concern to the respondents, for in his view it was a deliberate attempt to deceive the court and the respondents.
He also accused the court registry for compromising the work of the petitioners by failing to ensure proper checks on the exhibits before serving them on to the respondent.
But Mr. Addison in his response, denied any mischievous by the petitioners, saying the difference in the exhibits aroused out of the bulky nature of the exhibits they have had to attach to the case.
He said the exhibits were of the same, but only the numbering was different and therefore invited the court not to entertain the respondents’ allegation of mischievous, adding it was purely red-heading by the respondents to unduly delay the case.
After further cross examination on Dr AFARI-Gyan, the presiding judge, Mr. Justice William Atuguba adjourned the case till Monday June 10, 2013 for continuation.



No comments:

Post a Comment