KPMG MEETS JUDGES OVER FINAL REPORT ON AUDIT OF PINKSHEETS, BUT FARI-GYNA DECLARES PINKSHEETS NOT SENSITIVE MATERIAL

 The Enquirer,  Tuesday  11th June, 2013

By Felix Engsalige Nyaaba

The Supreme Court yesterday ended proceedings in the presidential election petition unexpectedly to meet KPMG International, the private accounting firm that was appointed by the court to serve as referee and conduct an audit counting into the polling stations pink sheets that the petitioners have filed as exhibits before the court.

The purpose of the meeting was not made openly in the court room, but information indicated that the meeting which was scheduled at the instance of KPMG has to do with the final report of the audit counting of the pink sheets.

Mr. Justice William Atuguba, president of the nine member panel hearing the petition case told parties in court that the court has received a notice from the referee, the KPMG inviting the court together with the parties involved in the matter to a meeting at 2:00 pm yesterday for deliberation.

Further information gathered at the court also pointed that the nine judges together with the parties will also discuss issues on the modalities of which KPMG would use in counting copies of the pink sheets of the presiding judges, Mr. Justice William Atuguba as ordered by the court last week.

The Supreme Court on June 5, ordered KPMG to conduct further counting on the president of the nine member panel Justices Atuguba’s copies of the pink sheets to aid in establishing  the true numbers of pink sheets the petitioners filed as exhibits at the court registry.

The further  orders of the court was as a result of an agreement arrived at  by the parties involved after KPMG has presented a drafted report of its audit counting to the court and the parties  per the earlier orders dated May 9, 2013.

Though the final report  was yet to be made public, information gathered indicated that KPMG has discovered over 13,000 pink sheets  which was contained in about 31 boxes as against the 11,842 pink sheets the petitioners’ claimed to have had  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 Audits Genesis

On May 9, 2013, the Supreme Court issued an order directed at KPMG, inviting it to conduct an audit counting into the number of 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 followed conflicting evidence by Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, the star witness and second petitioner in the presidential election petition in his attempt to answer questions posed to him by Mr. Tsikta during cross examination in relation with the number of polling station pink sheets the petitioners filed at the court registry as exhibits.

According to Mr. Tsikata the respondents  have not receive the total number  11,842 exhibits as stated by the petitioners in paragraph 44-67 in their affidavit  which they claimed to have  filed.

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 those contradictory answers from Dr.Bawumia, the NDC legal counsel then requested for an independent accounting body to conduct an audit counting into the number pink sheets filed by the petitioners as exhibits.

The request was granted and KPMG per the ruling will conduct an unbiased and fair audit account into the pink sheets and transmit its finding results to the court through the registrar of the Supreme Court for determination.

The court in its 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.

Pink Sheets Not Sensitive Materials to EC—Afari-Gyan

Dr Kwadwo Afari-Gyan, the official returning officer of the 2012 presidential election who is in the witness box over the election petition case, yesterday told the Supreme Court that, the election results booklet which is also known as pink sheets is not a sensitive document to the Electoral Commission (EC), until it is been used for recording of results during election.

According to the EC Chairman, unlike the Ballot Paper which has very serious reputation to the EC, the pink sheets as it is has no relevancy when it comes to security of the election material, adding that it becomes an important document to the commission only when election results are recorded on it.

In answer oppressive questions from Mr. Philip Addison, lead counsel for the petitioners on the security of the pink sheets in relation to its serial numbers, Dr Afari-Gyan said  the pink sheets were printed outside the country and that the EC has no control over the rang of numbers that the petitioners labeled as serial numbers.

He said when the contract bidding  process was published for the procurement of the pink sheets material, no Ghanaian company  come out with the capacity to print the material and that a company outside the Ghana won the bidding and the contract was awarded to produce 27,000 copies of the pink sheets for the 2012 presidential elections.

Dr Afar-Gyan admitted that the printing of the pink sheets were done after the balloting of the presidential candidate, but denied claims that the duplication of the pink sheets serial numbers was an irregularity.

Printing of Ballot Papers

 The EC boss indicated that, the Ballot papers is the only material that the EC attached serious security measures on its printing and distributing, adding that since the ballot papers could be fake due to the advance technology in the system, its serial numbers which served as security feature has seriousness attached to it.

Dr Afari-Gyan said seven companies were contracted to print the ballot papers and it was done the presence of the various political parties to monitor the printing of ballot papers at the printing houses where the ballot papers were printed.

He said there were instances when the representatives were able to track the movement of ballots, he said, adding, “It was not done secret.”

He also denied that the ballot boxes and the tempers evident envelops have serial numbers, saying the numbers on the boxes as well as the tempers evidence envelops have no uniqueness to a particular polling station.

Special Voting
Under intensive cross examination, the EC boss maintained his earlier evidence –in-chief that special voting was conducted for security personnel and electoral officials who would not be present at their designated polling stations on voting day and explained that ballots cast during special voting were sealed and counted after the close of poll on voting day.
He said there was one centre for special voting for each constituency and stated that it was not correct for Dr Bawumia to state that pink sheets were not issued for special voting, adding that some of the polling stations  have code numbers while do not have but uses designated names.

He also denied the allegation that the number of persons used as special voting was more than the number of list given to the petitioners’ party.

Voting Process
Dr. Afari-Gyan also denied that the allegation that many people were allowed to vote without going through the biometric verification process, but indicated that everybody went through the BVD process except those who were already known by the machine as face only (FO) and that there are evidence with the EC to prove that every voter voted with the use of the t going through the BVD.

He also stated that ballot boxes were turned upside down and placed in the open for the view of the public before voting commenced.
Voter Register

Dr Afari-Gyan further told the court that, the EC distributed a complete voter register to all parties including the petitioners’ party and therefore denied the allegation that the register given to the petitioners party was far less than what is with the EC and the national Democratic Congress (NDC).

He admitted that there were double registration in the over sea registration but maintained that no one voted twice and that the register was complete before the election.

He also told the court that the number of persons with face only increased when court ordered for the registration of some people in the Kassina-Nakani district who were not able to register during the normal registration period.

The cross examination continue to today by the lead counsel for the petitioners Mr Addison at 10:00 am.

The Petition
The hearing of the substantive petition April 17, 2013, and so far, Dr Bawumia has testified on behalf of the petitioners and has been cross-examined by lawyers for President Mahama, the EC and the NDC.

The General Secretary of the NDC, Mr Johnson Asiedu Nketia, has also given evidence on behalf of the NDC and President Mahama and has since been cross- examined by the other parties in the case.

The petitioners have alleged that the December 7 and 8, 2012 presidential election was fraught with malpractices of over-voting, non-signing of pink sheets by presiding officers or their assistants, voting without biometric verification and duplicated serial numbers of pink sheets.

However, President Mahama, the EC and the NDC have denied that any such irregularities occurred during the election.