KPMG’s report did not favour petitioners – Amaliba
A member of the legal team of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), Abraham Amaliba, is of the belief that the report submitted by international accounting and audit firm, KPMG, the referee appointed by the Supreme Court in the counting of the Pink Sheets, does not favour the petitioners, hence the lengthy cross-examination by their Lead Counsel, Philip Addison.
He claims the petitioners are not pleased with KPMG’s report and Philip Addison’s manner of cross-examination can be construed to mean KPMG did not do their work well.
Speaking to Okay FM in an interview, Abraham Amaliba said KPMG’s report revealed that the petitioners filed 13,926 pink sheets, but after the duplicates were sorted out, the actual number of pink sheets came up to 9,860, a little over 4,000 short of what the petitioners claim to have filed.
“…regarding the report, the petitioners are of the position that if they (KPMG) add the pink sheets which the respondents cross-examined Dr. Bawumia on and that of the copies with the President of the Panel which are not in the records of the court registry, the total number of pink sheets will add up to what the petitioners have filed in court,” he said.
He, however, pointed out that KPMG could not have added the comments or observations of the petitioners in their report since the order of the Supreme Court was not to add up the pink sheets of the respondents and that of the President of the Panel to those with the registrar.
“…Philip Addison cross-examined the KPMG rep for that length of time because the petitioners are worried and not pleased with the report; if the report had favoured them, they would not have cross-examined him for that long,” Amaliba said.