By
Felix Engsalige Nyaaba
The Supreme Court by a unanimous decision yesterday
dismissed the landmark presidential election petition filed by the three
leading members of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), challenging the results of
the December 2012 presidential election on grounds there were serious violation
of the election process which inured to President John Mahama.
The Supreme Court in its five minutes ruling upheld John
Mahama’s presidency as valid and dismissed the petition by the petitioners.
Giving the judgment, president of the nine member
panel, Mr. Justice William Atuguba said, “We unanimously dismiss the claims relating to
duplicate serial numbers, duplicate polling station codes, and unknown polling
stations, that is for short.”
He said, “well, this is the decision we have arrived at, upon
a scrutiny of the petition, we found that the issues to be determined are as
set out at page 125 of the counsel for the petitioners’ written address were as
follows: Over voting, voting without
biometric verification, absence of the signature of the presiding
officer, duplicate serial numbers, duplicate polling station codes,
unknown polling stations, that is to say results recorded for polling stations
that are not part of 26,002 polling stations provided by the second petitioner
in the petition.”
On
the issue of over voting allegation, Justices Atuguba, Adinyira, Baffoe-Bonnie,
Gbadegbe, and Akoto-Bamfo, dismiss the claim of over voting for lack of
evidence, while Dotsey, Ansah, Owusu and Anin-Yeboah upheld the claims.
Again,
Justices Atuguba, Adinyira, Baffoe-Bonnie, Gbadegbe, Akoto-Bamfo, disagreed with
the petitioners on the claims relating to absence of signature of presiding
officer and accordingly dismissed it.
The
petitioners claims on issues relating to voting without biometric verification
devices was also dismissed by Justices, Atuguba,
Adinyira, Dotsey, Baffoe-Bonnie, Gbadegbe,and Akoto-Bamfo.
Justices Ansah, Owusu and
Anim Yeboah however held a different view and granted all the three claims,
that is the issues of over voting, absence of presiding officers’ signature and
voting without biometric verification devices to annul the votes involved and ordered
for a rerun of the affected areas.
Justice
Jones Dotsey , on the other hand granted the claim of over-voting but has provided a
road-map in his judgement as in the figures of votes to be ascertained and
cancelled and also ordered for a re-run
of the areas affected.
He
further upheld the claim relating to absence of presiding officers’ signatures
on the pink sheets cancels the results concerned and ordered a rerun of the
areas affected.
Mr.
Justice Baffoe-Bonnie, in his sole view also granted the claim of voting
without biometric verification cancels the votes involved and ordered a rerun
of the areas affected.
The
Court therefore stated that, in the circumstances the overall effect was that
the first respondent, President John Dramani Mahama was validly elected and that
the petition was therefore dismissed.
The
court said for the sake of convenience the various judgments by panel are been handed
over to the registrar of the court and parties and any other member of the
public can access.
It
also commended the services of KPMG, the referee appointed to undertake the
count of the pink sheet for the services offered during the trial as well as
legal counsels on all sides of the case.
Petitioners’ case
The Petitioners in the case were the 2012 Presidential candidate of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo; his running mate Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia and the party’s national chairman Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey –
The Petitioners in the case were the 2012 Presidential candidate of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo; his running mate Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia and the party’s national chairman Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey –
They filed the petition and sought the court annul over 4.3 million
votes affecting 10,119 polling station out of the 26,02 polling nation wide in the
December 2012 presidential poll on grounds of alleged serious infractions,
which they insisted, could not have gone uninvestigated.
They also prayed the Court to declare Nana Akufo-Addo as President on the grounds that statutory violation, malpractices and irregularities at 10,119 polling stations justified the nullification of 3,931,339 “invalid votes” which they argued, would have beaten down President Mahama votes and overturned the results declared by the Electoral Commission.
According to the petitioners’ pleadings, over-voting occurred at 1,722 polling stations, while voting without biometric verification affected 2,020 polling stations.
They also claimed that there were 1,638 polling stations where presiding officers failed or refused to sign the results statement form (pink sheets) while the use of duplicate serial numbers on pink sheets affected 8,987 polling stations.
The Petitioners in their case also contended that if the results of the 10,119 polling stations were annulled, President Mahama’s votes would have reduced by 2,622,551, which would have, in turn, beaten down the results declared by the Electoral Commission in his favour, to 41.79 per cent.
By that same principle, the Petitioners said though Nana Akufo-Addo’s votes would have, in like manner, been reduced by 1,233,186, he would have nonetheless secured 56.85 per cent, per their permutations, to cross the 50 per cent mark for victory.
According to the petitioners, Article 63 (3) of the Constitution insists that only valid votes be taken into account in the determination of the validity of the election of the President and therefore urged the court to uphold the clause in the Constitution.
They also prayed the Court to declare Nana Akufo-Addo as President on the grounds that statutory violation, malpractices and irregularities at 10,119 polling stations justified the nullification of 3,931,339 “invalid votes” which they argued, would have beaten down President Mahama votes and overturned the results declared by the Electoral Commission.
According to the petitioners’ pleadings, over-voting occurred at 1,722 polling stations, while voting without biometric verification affected 2,020 polling stations.
They also claimed that there were 1,638 polling stations where presiding officers failed or refused to sign the results statement form (pink sheets) while the use of duplicate serial numbers on pink sheets affected 8,987 polling stations.
The Petitioners in their case also contended that if the results of the 10,119 polling stations were annulled, President Mahama’s votes would have reduced by 2,622,551, which would have, in turn, beaten down the results declared by the Electoral Commission in his favour, to 41.79 per cent.
By that same principle, the Petitioners said though Nana Akufo-Addo’s votes would have, in like manner, been reduced by 1,233,186, he would have nonetheless secured 56.85 per cent, per their permutations, to cross the 50 per cent mark for victory.
According to the petitioners, Article 63 (3) of the Constitution insists that only valid votes be taken into account in the determination of the validity of the election of the President and therefore urged the court to uphold the clause in the Constitution.
They said per their analysis, President Mahama’s
5,574,761 as declared by the EC on December 9, 2012 should have been 2,952,210,
representing 41.79% since votes totaling 2,622,551 out of the figure announced
were invalid.
“The declaration made on 9th December 2012 by the
2nd respondent and set out in the Constitutional Instrument of the President Elect
Instrument, 2012 (C. I. 80), made under the hand of the Chairman of 2nd
respondent, was therefore made wrongfully and this Court is respectfully
invited to hold his election was invalid and to set aside same as null and
void.”
In the same vein, the petitioners submitted that the
5,248,898 declared by Dr. Afari-Gyan for Nana Akufo-Addo should have been
4,0157,12 representing 56.85% since 1,233,186 of the votes were invalid and
should be annulled.
But the respondents, which were made up of the President,
Mr John Dramani Mahama, the Electoral Commission (EC) and the National
Democratic Congress (NDC), dismissed the claims put forward by the petitioners.
They in their respective responses prayed the court to dismiss the petition claiming that the petitioners have
failed to prove undeniable evidence that warrant the annulment of over 4.3
million Ghanaians votes.
They also contended in their respective summary of case,
known as written submission for the court to dismiss the petition for the
claims were brought in bad faith.
The judges that have been hearing the case since it
was filed are Mr. Justice William Atuguba, president of the panel, Mr. Justice
Julius Ansah, Justice Sophia Ophelia Adinyira(Mrs.), Justice Rose Comfort Owusu
(Ms) and Mr. Justice Jones Victor Dotse.
The rest
are, Mr. Justice Anin Yeboah, Mr Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, Mr. Justice
Nashiru Sulley Gbadegbe and Justice Vida Akoto Bamfo(Mrs).
The petitioners were represented by eleven lawyers
led by Mr. Philip Addison, while
the three respondents lead Counsel were Tony Lithur for
the President; James Quashie-Idun for the Electoral Commission and Tsatsu
Tsikata for the NDC.
Witnesses
The case which last eight months received some key witnesses includes Dr. Bawumia; for the petitioners, the NDC’s General Secretary Mr. Johnson Asiedu-Nketia; Chairman of the Electoral Commission Dr. Kwadwo Afari-Gyan and a representative of international auditing firm, KPMG, Nii Amanor Dodoo.
Contempt cases
In the course of the hearing, a few Contemnors were hauled before the Court for criminal contempt.
They included a Deputy Communications Director of the NPP, Mr. Sammy Awuku, who had, during the hearing, described the panel of Justices as “hypocritical and selective”.
Mr. Awuku was not given a custodial sentence despite his conviction for criminal contempt. He was nonetheless strongly reprimanded by the Court and banned from attending the hearing thereon.
Subsequent to Mr. Awuku’s contempt hearing, the Managing Editor of the Daily Searchlight, Mr. Ken Kuranchie and a member of the communications team of the NDC, Mr. Steven Atubiga, were jailed for 10 and three days, respectively, for the same offence.
The Court took judicial notice of Mr. Kuranchie’s justification of Mr. Awuku’s description of the Bench as “hypocritical and selective”.
He was given a harsher sentence for what the Court saw as his belligerence and unremorseful posture.
Mr. Atubiga, who had threatened on radio that President Mahama will not hand over to Nana Akufo-Addo even if the Court ruled to that effect, was, on the other hand, given a lighter sentence, after displaying abject remorse both outside the Court prior to his appearance as well as when he appeared before the Bench for his hearing.
The gavel of contempt also fell on the NPP’s General Secretary Kwadwo Owusu Afriyie, popularly known as ‘Sir John’ for using unsavoury words against the President of the Bench, Justice William Atuguba.
Sir John was however spared custodial sentencing but fined Ghc5,000 in addition to a harsh scolding and signing of a bond to be of good behaviour for six months.
Also, fellow NPP Communicator, Hopeson Adorye, who threatened on radio, to decapitate supporters of the NDC if the Court ruled in favour of President Mahama, was fined Ghc2, 000 and also made to sign a bond to be of good behaviour.
Akufo-Addo: I disagree with SC’s verdict but I accept
Witnesses
The case which last eight months received some key witnesses includes Dr. Bawumia; for the petitioners, the NDC’s General Secretary Mr. Johnson Asiedu-Nketia; Chairman of the Electoral Commission Dr. Kwadwo Afari-Gyan and a representative of international auditing firm, KPMG, Nii Amanor Dodoo.
Contempt cases
In the course of the hearing, a few Contemnors were hauled before the Court for criminal contempt.
They included a Deputy Communications Director of the NPP, Mr. Sammy Awuku, who had, during the hearing, described the panel of Justices as “hypocritical and selective”.
Mr. Awuku was not given a custodial sentence despite his conviction for criminal contempt. He was nonetheless strongly reprimanded by the Court and banned from attending the hearing thereon.
Subsequent to Mr. Awuku’s contempt hearing, the Managing Editor of the Daily Searchlight, Mr. Ken Kuranchie and a member of the communications team of the NDC, Mr. Steven Atubiga, were jailed for 10 and three days, respectively, for the same offence.
The Court took judicial notice of Mr. Kuranchie’s justification of Mr. Awuku’s description of the Bench as “hypocritical and selective”.
He was given a harsher sentence for what the Court saw as his belligerence and unremorseful posture.
Mr. Atubiga, who had threatened on radio that President Mahama will not hand over to Nana Akufo-Addo even if the Court ruled to that effect, was, on the other hand, given a lighter sentence, after displaying abject remorse both outside the Court prior to his appearance as well as when he appeared before the Bench for his hearing.
The gavel of contempt also fell on the NPP’s General Secretary Kwadwo Owusu Afriyie, popularly known as ‘Sir John’ for using unsavoury words against the President of the Bench, Justice William Atuguba.
Sir John was however spared custodial sentencing but fined Ghc5,000 in addition to a harsh scolding and signing of a bond to be of good behaviour for six months.
Also, fellow NPP Communicator, Hopeson Adorye, who threatened on radio, to decapitate supporters of the NDC if the Court ruled in favour of President Mahama, was fined Ghc2, 000 and also made to sign a bond to be of good behaviour.
Akufo-Addo: I disagree with SC’s verdict but I accept
Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo after the court verdict
yesterday held a press conference to express his opinion on the landmark case
which he was expecting to be made president of the republic of Ghana.
He told NPP supporters at the party head office that
he “disagrees” with the Supreme Court’s verdict on the election petition case
but “will not ask for a review”.
“I disagree with the court’s decision but I accept it and I ask all our supporters to accept the verdict”, the 2012 Presidential candidate of the main opposition New Patriotic Party and first petitioner in the case told journalists at the Supreme Court minutes after the verdict was pronounced.
He said: “I accept the decision but I’m saddened and disappointed by the verdict and I know many of our supporters are saddened too”.
According to him, “we shall not ask for a review so we can all move on”.
Nana Akufo-Addo said: “Ghana’s election will never be the same again after this petition”.
He added that: “We have set precedence for generations to follow”.
He urged the two parties to put their differences aside aside and come together to build Ghana adding that he had called President John Mahama to congratulate him.
“This is the time for all of us to come together and work together to find solutions”.
“To my party, I say we have a lot to be proud of. Let us wish our president well and thank the almighty…the battle continues to be the Lord’s”, Nana Akufo-Addo noted.
The former Attorney General said: “I will take some time out and reflect” before announcing a decision concerning his future in Ghana’s politics.
“I disagree with the court’s decision but I accept it and I ask all our supporters to accept the verdict”, the 2012 Presidential candidate of the main opposition New Patriotic Party and first petitioner in the case told journalists at the Supreme Court minutes after the verdict was pronounced.
He said: “I accept the decision but I’m saddened and disappointed by the verdict and I know many of our supporters are saddened too”.
According to him, “we shall not ask for a review so we can all move on”.
Nana Akufo-Addo said: “Ghana’s election will never be the same again after this petition”.
He added that: “We have set precedence for generations to follow”.
He urged the two parties to put their differences aside aside and come together to build Ghana adding that he had called President John Mahama to congratulate him.
“This is the time for all of us to come together and work together to find solutions”.
“To my party, I say we have a lot to be proud of. Let us wish our president well and thank the almighty…the battle continues to be the Lord’s”, Nana Akufo-Addo noted.
The former Attorney General said: “I will take some time out and reflect” before announcing a decision concerning his future in Ghana’s politics.
No comments:
Post a Comment