Hearing begins April 16: Supreme Court narrows issues to two
Crucial Issues
Some of the irregularities, malpractices, omissions and violations complained of and due to be determined by the court are allegations of persons being allowed to vote without biometric verification, some presiding officers and/or their assistants not signing declaration forms (pink sheets), total number of votes cast exceeding the total number of registered voters as well as total number of ballot papers issued.
Other irregularities to be considered by the court include whether or not the alleged statutory violations introduced 4,670,504 invalid votes cast in the December 2012 presidential election as well as whether or not ballots cast without biometric verification were taken into account by the Electoral Commission (EC) in the declaration of results among others.
President’s Contention
Counsel for President Mahama, Mr Tony Lithur, informed the court that the petitioners had provided particulars for 8,579 instead of 11,916 polling stations, where alleged irregularities took place during the December 2012 presidential polls.
He alluded that the petitioners embarked on double counting and for that reason the court should accordingly order the petitioners to provide particulars in respect of the remaining polling stations beyond the 8,579 polling stations.
In the alternative, Mr Lithur prayed the court to order the petitioners to amend their second amended petition, to reflect the actual number of polling stations in respect of which they had provided particulars.
But a lawyer for the petitioners, Mr Philip Addison, held a different view indicating that the EC and the NDC had not objected to the 11,916 figure, adding “we will prove in the course of the trial that his calculation is wrong.”
EC, NDC oppose Mr Addison
Responding to Mr Addison’s submissions, lawyers for the EC and the NDC, Mr James Quashie-Idun and Mr Tsatsu Tsikata, disagreed and indicated they also had problems with the figures provided by the petitioners.
Mr Quashie-Idun informed the court that the EC had argued in its amended answer to the petition that the petitioners had not provided all the particulars on the 11,916 polling stations where alleged irregularities took place.
Mr Tsikata also stated that, “they are not acknowledging what they have supplied. The court will have to determine who is arithmetically challenged.”
The President of the court, Mr Justice William Atuguba, intervened and stated that the court will ascertain the actual figure in the course of the trial.
EC Amendment upheld
The court in a 6-3 majority decision, allowed the EC to provide clarification regarding the allegation that some declaration of results from different polling stations had the same serial numbers.
On the EC’s issue that 22 locations provided by the petitioners out of the 28 locations as being areas where elections took place illegally, the court struck out the remaining six areas that were not provided by the petitioners.
According to the petitioners who are - the presidential candidate of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo; his running mate, Dr Mahamadu Bawumia and the Chairman of the NPP, Mr Jake Obetesebi-Lamptey, gross and widespread irregularities took place in 11,916 polling stations.
They are, therefore, calling for the annulment of 4,670,504 votes cast in those 11,916 polling stations.
But President Mahama, the EC and the National Democratic Congress (NDC) have denied any wrongdoing, and are of the view that the polls were free, fair and transparent; and for that reason, results declared were credible and accurate.
The Supreme Court (Amendment) Rule, 2012, (C. I. 74)
The main objective of the Supreme Court (Amendment) Rule, 2012, (C. I. 74) is to ensure that petitions of this nature are disposed of expeditiously.
By virtue of provisions in the Supreme Court (Amendment) Rules, 2012 (C.I. 74), the matter will be determined once and for all, since no provision is made for a review of the court’s decision, although the 1992 Constitution allows the court to review its own decisions.
The amendment to the Supreme Court rules states among other things that the hearing of a petition against a presidential election shall be done on a daily basis, including public holidays.
Story by Mabel Aku Banaseh
Writer’s e-mail:
