51
Opinions Mon, 27 May 2013

Who Bloated Pink Sheets At Supreme Court

Catch Thief! …Who Bloated Pink Sheets At Supreme Court

By Margaret Jackson

May 26, 2013

There were loads of surprises awaiting the representatives of President John Mahama, the NDC and the Electoral Commission (EC) when they went to the Supreme Court (SC) to witness the resumed counting of the controversial pink sheets submitted by the NPP with their affidavits. The counting of the pink sheets was to be done by KPMG, the accounting firm engaged by the SC.

The counting of the pink sheets was suspended when representatives of the NDC, EC and President Mahama found to their disappointment that the boxes with the “P” Category which numbered 10 had ballooned to 17 pushing the overall number of boxes with the exhibits from 24 to 31.

However, the justices of the SC ordered the counting of the pink sheets to resume, but advised the respondents to file their complaint to be included in the final report by the KPMG. If the surprise that jolted the respondents on the first day that the counting was to be done was anything to go by, then they were in for more shocks when they went back to the SC for the counting to resume.

When the representatives of the respondents returned to the SC for counting to resume, they found that another mysterious box with pink sheets has suddenly appeared from nowhere and has been added to the “P” Category thus bringing the total number of boxes to 32. But that was not all. The labelling of the boxes presented by the Registrar of the SC to KPMG was totally different from the ones given to all the three respondents when the NPP filed their case at the SC.

We all remember Dr Mahamadu Bawumia, the NPP star witness of the on-going Supreme Court challenge to the 2012 Presidential Election results saying emphatically under oath multiple of times that, the total number of pink sheets they filed with their affidavits were 11,842.

Bawumia made everybody aware at the SC that his numbers were right and that everybody should run with it to the bank. Who therefore, are you to challenge a banker who rose to become the deputy Governor of the Bank of Ghana, unless you are aware of his evasiveness in the witness box?

But when the counting was done by the KPMG, the total number of pink sheets from the NPP overstuffed from the supposed 11,842 to 13,928, a whopping difference of 2,086. When you look at the table below, you need no calculator or look through Bawumia’s rejected analysis to determine that most of the bloating came from the “P” Category on line 13 on the table.

Dr Bawumia again told the court that the “P” Category has pink sheets totalling 6,823. He was captured under oath for saying this so many times. Yet, when KPMG counted the pinks sheets in the “P” Category boxes the number suddenly changed from Bawumia’s 6,823 to 8905, another gigantic difference of 2,082.

And it is this same “P” Category which the respondents are claiming that some mischievous person/s have jacked up the boxes from 10 to 18. Now who may have done that? Just ponder your answer as we move on to some more surprises.

If a desperate thief is bent on stealing, he/she will do anything within his/her means to achieve that terrible goal. But those desperate thieves who are normally not smart enough tend to leave traces behind.

And that was what happened at the offices of the Registrar of the Supreme Court. We have seen the number of pink sheets supposedly sent by the NPP jacked up from 11,842 to 13,928. Interestingly, the pink sheets that were counted have new pink sheets that the NPP did not file with their affidavits. The supposed “smart” thief is outed. He/she left tons of traces which puts loads of question marks on the NPP behind.

So who played the smart thief in this episode? Your guess is as good as mine. If you are at the SC Registry and you have started shivering for no apparent reason, and the labelling of the exhibits you presented to KPMG is totally different from what was given to the respondents by the petitioners whilst boxes of exhibits left in your care have zoomed from 24 to 32, then you have a lot of explanation to do.

The NPP claim they submitted 11,842 pink sheets to buttress their case. Why then has the number of pink sheets now increased by more than 2,000? The NPP initially claimed that they filed 11,916 pink sheets with their affidavits but decided to reduce it because they have to let go some of their so-called allegations. If indeed they let go some of their allegations and dropped their pink sheets under contention from 11,916 to 11,842, why has the pink sheets now ballooned to 13,928?

That is why we have a bigger problem on hand, and therefore have to go look for the thief at the Supreme Courthouse who bloated the pink sheets. The NPP supporters should not celebrate that they passed their magical number of 11,842 to 13,928. It does not make them look good and seriously puts a jolt on their mathematical skills.

Under the rules of the court, the NPP has a lot of explanation to give to the nine justices. They have indeed misled the court into believing that they filed 11,842 pink sheets when in fact the pink sheets are 2,000 pieces more. Where is the extra pink sheets coming from and what are they going to be used for?

There is only one way that this issue can be settled to determine who is speaking the truth. All the justices of the SC were given the same number of boxes with the pink sheet exhibits and labelling. The respondents have same. It seems it’s the exhibits at the SC Registrar’s office that is tainted and remains questionable.

Therefore, to get to the bottom of this, the exhibits at the offices of Justice William Atuguba, the president of the panel should be counted. It is only when the exhibits at Justice Atuguba’s office are audited that Ghanaians and the International Community will know the truth. If the exhibits at Justice Atuguba’s office are audited and it ties with that of the Registrar’s office, then we can conclude that the NPP are speaking the truth.

On the other hand, if the exhibits at Justice Atuguba’s office are audited and it ties with that of the respondents then we will know that there is indeed a “Thief of Bagdad” who has metamorphosed into the Supreme Courthouse to cause mischief.

We are watching with keep eyes and will update Ghanaians if anything new pops up. For now, we should all study the table below and draw our own conclusions.

PINK SHEET AUDIT

(COUNT BASED ON 2ND AMENDED AFFIDAVIT FROM PARAGRAPH 44 TO 67)

ALSO BASED ON THE LIST FROM THE REGISTRAR AS PER WHAT THE PETITIONERS SAID THEY TRULY FILED WITH THE COURT

NO. PETITIONERS SECOND AMENDED AFFIDAVIT EXPECTED PINK SHEETS COUNTED PINK SHEETS DIFFERENCE

1 MB-C, MB-C-1 TO MB-C-319 320 318 -2

2 MB-D, MB-D-1 TO MB-D-121 122 122 0

3 MB-E, MB-E-1 TO MB-E-373 374 371 -3

4 MB-F, MB-F-1 TO MB-F-65 66 59 -7

5 MB-G, MB-G-1 TO MB-G-19 20 20 0

6 MB-H, MB-H-1 TO MB-H-881 882 910 28

7 MB-J, MB-J-1 TO MB-J-195 196 195 -1

8 MB-K, MB-K-1 TO MB-K-70 71 84 13

9 MB-L, MB-L-1 TO MB-L-378 379 382 3

10 MB-M, MB-M-1 TO MB-M-1,067 1,068 1,086 18

11 MB-N, MB-N-1 TO MB-N-185 186 181 -5

12 MB-0, MB-O-1 TO MB-O-58 59 59 0

13 MB-P, MB-P-1 TO MB-P-6,822 6,823 8,905 2,082

14 MB-Q, MB-Q-1 TO MB-Q-906 907 874 -33

15 MB-S, MB-S-1 TO MB-S-309 310 306 -4

16 MB-T, MB-T-1 TO MB-T-2 3 3 0

17 MB-U, MB-U-1 2 2 0

18 MB-V, MB-V-1 TO MB-V-11 12 12 0

19 MB-W, MB-W-1 TO MB-W-3 4 4 0

20 MB-X, MB-X-1 TO MB-X-7 8 6 -2

21 MB-Y, MB-Y-1 2 2 0

22 MB-Z, MB-Z-1 TO MB-Z-3 4 2 -2

23 MB-AA, MB-AA-1 2 2 0

24 MB-AB, MB-AB-1 TO MB-AB-22 22 23 1

TOTAL 11,842 13,928 2,086

magjackson80@yahoo.com

http://majjacks80.blogspot.com

Columnist: Jackson, Margaret