Ghana election hearing: Court directs respondents to complain to KPMG

The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the respondents in the election petition to channel their concerns on the alleged introduction of seven extra boxes of exhibits to the committee supervising the auditing of the pink sheets.

The court said the concerns raised by the respondents were within the mandate of the referee (KPMG) to deal with them.

The ruling by the court follows an oral application by Mr Tsatsu Tsikata, Counsel for the National Democratic Congress, that seven additional boxes of exhibits have been added to the 24 boxes which were already in the custody of the Court Registry prior to the auditing.

Justice William Atuguba, Presiding Judge, giving the ruling, directed the respondents to put their concerns before the committee supervising the auditing of the pink sheet exhibits in order to be incorporated into the committee’s report.

Mr Tsikata, in moving the motion, said the respondents became aware of “significant development” on Monday during the count of the pink sheets that was ordered by the court.

He said it emerged that as many as seven boxes of exhibits were added to the boxes in the custody of the Registry adding that all three respondents had the same number of 24 boxes and not 31 as provided for the start of the counting.

Mr Tsikata alleged that as at last Thursday when preparations were made, 24 boxes were confirmed by their representative.

He said respondents on Monday sought to have audience with the court with counsel for petitioners but the petitioners counsel refused to join them.

He said control mechanisms needed to be resorted to and widened to include the copies of exhibits distributed to “at least two other Lordships”.

Mr Tsikata argued that the referee, without any of the parties, went to check the documents in the registry adding that the referee found three boxes which had been duplicated.

He said it was not possible to proceed with the count when the security of the process had been compromised.

Mr Tony Lithur, Counsel for President John Mahama, said he was asked to stand outside when he visited the counting centre because they would be on break soon to discuss any issue.

He, however, supported the suggestions made by Mr Tsikata.

Mr Quarshie Idun, Counsel for the Electoral Commission (EC) said the EC’s representative was in the counting room.

He said he discussed the issue with Mr Assirifi, one of the observers in the counting room, who said he would contact Mr Addison and get back to him but he did not get back to him. He concurred with the suggestion made by Mr Tsikata.

Mr Philip Addison, Counsel for the petitioners, in opposing the application, said there was a “sinister agenda” to deprive petitioners of their case.

He said the counting started well but while the EC was expecting “shortages rather found overages”. The respondents then started “cooking up stories”.

Mr Lithur, however, objected to his “cooking up allegations” saying they checked 24 boxes, indicating that was not a cooked allegation.

Mr Addison argued that they were not aware of any inventory-taking adding that respondents probably knew more than petitioners did since respondents met with referee “behind their back”.

Justice Atuguba, at that juncture, intervened and said civil language should be used and not insinuations.

Mr Addison said the respondents had been playing some strange tactics with petitioners.

“They are behaving like children who have been pampered, and when they get a goal against them “they say they won’t play again” he said.

Mr Addison accused the respondents of interfering with the auditing process by not seeking accreditation from the court and also stopping the process.

He said the allegations being made by respondents were just based on suspicion and nothing more.

He said no report had been made by KPMG until respondents interrupted the process adding that the respondents should make their recommendations to the committee to be included in their report but not to suspend the count.

In a related development, Mr Tsikata announced to the court that he was bringing his cross-examination of Dr Bawumia to an end subject to the counting by KPMG.

Mr Lithur also stated that he may cross-examine the witness after the count.

Mr Addison, at that juncture, enquired from the court if Mr Tsikata had finished his cross-examination.

He said he would want Mr Tsikata to be supplied with the pink sheets he claimed were not in his affidavits so that he could continue cross-examining the witness.

Justice Atuguba said subject to referee’s report, Mr Tsikata had finished his cross-examination.

He, however, asked Mr Addison to start his re-examination of the witness but he was unwilling.

Mr Addison, however, argued that Mr Tsikata should completely finish his cross-examination before he starts his re-examination of the witness.

Source: GNA