The NDC general secretary, Johnson Asiedu Nketia begins his cross-examination at the Supreme Court on Monday as the petition hearing is resumed.
This follows the seven-member panel of judges which struck parts of Mr. Nketia’s witness statement.
On behalf of the 2020 flagbearer of his party, the veteran politician testified that, due to her [Jean Mensa] familial ties with the wife of the 2nd respondent, Rebecca Akufo-Addo, the EC Chairperson Jean Mensa was inclined to fulfill her role in relation with the just-ended December 7 elections.
But Akoto Ampaw, the Second Respondent’s counsel, objected to this and some other arguments made by the petitioner’s witness on Friday. He noted that the allegations were extremely serious and that Mr. Mahama’s pleadings could not be supported.
The Court then pointed out seven paragraphs of the 10 paragraphs that were objected to by President
Akufo-Addo’s lawyer and permitted the witness to be cross-examined.
Mr. Asiedu Nketia explained, in his back and forth with the lawyer of the EC, Justin Amenuvor that while he is not the Petitioner in this instance and therefore may not be able to answer a few questions, Mr. Mahama is motivated in court to appeal to the Electoral Commission for certain acts and inactions and not simply to try to declare
different election results.
The lawyers of President Akufo-Addo stated that they possessed some videos in which NDC leaders declared
different results of the 2020 polls and declared Mr. Mahama as President-elect. This assertion was however challenged.
The case was then scheduled to today, February 1, 2021 to allow all video evidence as hearing summaries to be played in court.
Meanwhile, a member of President Akufo-Addo’s legal team, Frank Davies has expressed worry over the refusal of the petitioner; John Dramani Mahama to file his witness statement.
Speaking to the press after Friday’s hearing, Frank Davies said it is imperative for the petitioner to present the evidence he claims as a basis for filing the 2020 election petition.
“It is very instructive to let all Ghanaians know that the one person who filed the petition, John Dramani Mahama has refused, failed or neglected to sign onto a witness statement.
“The witness himself has no witness statement before the court,” he said.
The legal counsel for the Second Respondent again argued that the petitioner’s ambition to pray for a run-off from the Supreme Court should necessitate his submission of a witness statement.
“This same person is refusing to come out and give evidence in court,” he added.
But in contrast to Frank Davies’ claims, a member of Mr. Mahama’s legal team, Dominic Ayine said the submissions made by Akufo-Addo’s legal counsel are misplaced and hold no basis.
According to Dominic Ayine, the petitioner, John Mahama has acted in accordance with guidelines stipulated in the 1992 constitution, hence has breached no law.
“It is far from being the case that John Dramani Mahama himself must testify in this matter. He has filed a petition, he is entitled as of right under the law to call witnesses in aid of his case and that is what he has done,” he said.
He stated that President Akufo-Addo, during the 2012 election petition, failed to testify as a witness but rather called witnesses to testify on his behalf.
“I am surprised that a senior Lawyer of Frank Davies’ stature is confusing petitioner with witnesses that the petitioner calls,” he added.
Citing the 2012 election petition filed by President Akufo-Addo, Dominic Ayine questioned the morals of Frank Davies.
“So is it the case that when it comes to His Excellency John Dramani Mahama, the law must change and compel him to testify,” he quizzed.
For any adverts kindly send your ads or stories via email – email@example.com or WhatsApp 0557449200
SUBSCRIBE to our YouTube Channel @bibinitv Instagram @bibini_tv Twitter @bibiniqwaku