Election Petition: Supreme Court dismisses petitioner’s application for the fourth time

The Supreme Court has for the fourth consecutive time dismissed an application filed by the lawyers for the petitioner, John Dramani Mahama, in the ongoing election petition hearing.

GhanaWeb chronicles the various applications by the petitioner dismissed by the Supreme Court.

1. Inspection of the original documents of Form 13 and similar documents of the EC

The Supreme Court of Ghana on Wednesday, 03 February 2021, dismissed an application filed by the lawyers for the petitioner in the election petition hearing, John Dramani Mahama, to inspect the original documents of the 1st Respondent, the Electoral Commission.

The Chief Justice, Justice Kwasi Anin Yeboah in dismissing the application ruled that “the proceedings so far show that the petitioner has copies of the documents which were the subject of the instant application.

"We are of the view that no proper case has been laid before us to warrant the exercise of our discretion in favour of the applicant," the CJ declared.

“Order 29 of C.I. 47 which is the basis of this application should not be read in isolation, it should be read in conjunction with Rule 11 of the said Order.”

He added that Section 166 of the Evidence Act 323 of 1975 “makes it clear that a duplicate of a document is admissible to the same extent as the original unless a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the duplicate. No issue has been raised against the authenticity of the document in possession of the applicant.”



2. Interrogatories application

The Supreme Court dismissed the application which sought to ask the court to grant leave for the Electoral Commission (1st Respondent) to answer 12 questions regarding the declaration of the presidential election results.

The application which was filed Monday, January 18, 2021, was moved by counsel for John Dramani Mahama, Tsatsu Tsikata, at the Supreme Court on Tuesday morning (Jan 19).

The court had initially planned to move into the pre-trial issues of case management in the petition to determine the common grounds for the case to proceed.

But that was overtaken by the application which was to be determined.

Moving the motion on Tuesday, Mr Tsikata argued that the objective of the application was to “narrow down” the issues for the trial.

However, a seven-member panel of the court presided over by the Chief Justice, Justice Kwasi Anin Yeboah, dismissed the application with the view that the crucial issues of relevance had not been established by the petitioner.

RULING:

The “Certified True Copy” of the ruling obtained by GhanaWeb is reproduced here verbatim as follows:

“The Petitioner/Applicant has prayed this Court to grant the application to serve interrogatories. The basis for the application as argued by learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Applicant is to assist the Court to narrow issues for the trial of this petition.

Interrogatories under Common Law is discretionary, it should be granted or refused when all the circumstances are taken into consideration. It should be noted that the questions seek to elicit answers to the issues raised by and the reliefs sought in the petition. Interrogatories must be relevant to the issues and relate to the matter in controversy between the parties, in this case, the petitioner and the 1st Respondent.

The Court is of the opinion that the crucial issue of relevancy has not been established in this application. Reference was made to the 2013 Election Petition titled: NANA ADDO DANKWA AKUFO-ADDO & 2 ORS VRS JOHN DRAMANI MAHAMA & 2 ORS [2013] SCGLR 50, in which an application to serve interrogatories was granted by this court. However, subsequent to 2013, several statutory amendments have been made by C.I. 99 of 2016 which has restricted the practice and procedure of this Court as regards Election Petitions.

Indeed, Rule 69(c)(4) of the Supreme Court Amendment Rules C.I. 99 directs the expeditious disposal of the Petition and sets timelines for this Court to dispose of (sic) the Petition. It implies that even amendments ought not to be sought and granted as well as joinder of parties. Subsequent statutory amendments pointed out after 2013 have provided us with [a] new procedural regime and strict timelines.

We are strictly bound to comply with C.I. 99 and therefore we will not apply Order 22 of C.I. 47 of 2004 in this circumstance. We accordingly refuse to grant the application and same is accordingly dismissed.”

Find below the 12 questions filed under “Interrogatories” that were dismissed:

1. Was there a practice in previous Presidential Elections in the 4th Republic of collated figures from constituencies being received in “the strong room” at the Headquarters of 1st Respondent in the presence of agents of the candidates?

2. Was that practice described in paragraph 1 herein followed in respect of the 7th December 2020 elections?

3. Is the 7th December 2020 Presidential Election the first time Regional Collation Centres have been interposed between Constituency Collation Centres and the Headquarters of 1st Respondent?

4. How were results transmitted from the Constituency Collation Centres to the Regional Collation Centres?

5. How were results transmitted from the Regional Collation Centres to the Headquarters of 1st Respondent?

6. Did the National Communications Authority facilitate in any way the transmission of results to the Headquarters of 1st Respondent?

7. When did Mrs Jean Adukwei Mensa, the Chairperson of 1st Respondent and the Returning Officer for the Presidential Election, first realise there were errors in figures she had announced in her Declaration of 9 December 2020?

8. How did Mrs Jean Adukwei Mensa, the Chairperson of 1st Respondent and the Returning Officer for the Presidential Election, get to realise there were errors in figures she had announced in her Declaration of 9 December 2020?

9. In respect of the purported “corrections” made to the figures in the declaration by 1st Respondent, was there any prior process of conferring with agents of the Presidential Candidates?

10. Did Mrs Jean Adukwei Mensa, the Chairperson of the 1st Respondent, present Form 13 (The Declaration of Presidential Result Form) to all the agents of the Presidential Candidates to sign; and, if so, did all of the agents sign?

11. On which date did Mrs Jean Adukwei Mensa, the Chairperson of the 1st Respondent, post a copy of Form 13 at the Head Office of the 1st Respondent?

12. Did the 1st Respondent record any discrepancies which were occasioned by computational and mathematical errors in the course of the collation of the results?



3. Mahama’s motion for EC Chair to admit errors

The Supreme Court yet again dismissed a motion filed by the lawyers of John Dramani Mahama in the election petition case seeking to require the Electoral Commissioner to admit that she made errors during her declaration of election results.

The petitioner filed a motion at the Supreme Court asking Jean Mensa to acknowledge that she made errors during her declaration of the 2020 election results.

Among other things, Mahama was seeking that the EC Chairperson admits that the Declaration on television rather reveals that the figures and percentages announced if collated properly will come to 100.3% instead of 100%.

But on the first day of the election petition hearing, the Supreme court described as irrelevant Mahama’s request.

This was after both lawyers for the Electoral Commission and President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo had opposed the application.

The lawyers added that John Mahama and his legal team are trying to resort to dubious means of seeking further information from the EC that were not captured in their petition.

On his part, the leader of the legal team representing President Akufo-Addo, Akoto Ampaw described the application as a “fishing expedition”.

4. Review of Interrogatories application

The Supreme Court dismissed former President John Dramani Mahama's application for a review of its decision that disallowed him from asking the Electoral Commission (EC) 12 questions in the 2020 presidential election petition.

A new panel of the court in its ruling Thursday, January 28, said that the applicant had not met the threshold to apply for review and was subsequently dismissed.

Two additional justices, Justice Imoro Tanko and Justice Henrietta Mensah Bonsu were added to the original seven-member panel for the review application.

The seven other justices on the panel hearing the petition to determine whether or not, among other things, 1) President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo is the validly elected President of Ghana in accordance with Article 63 of the Constitution and whether the EC had complied with C.I. 127 are the Chief Justice, Justice Kwasi Anin Yeboah, Justice Yaw Apau, Justice Samuel Kofi Marful-Sau, Justice Prof. Nii Ashie Kotey, Justice Nene A. O. Amegatcher, Justice Gertrude Torkonoo and Justice Mariama Owusu.