Did Afari-gyan invoke his right to silence?

Read Article

Comments (43)

This article is closed for comments.

Read Comments Comments (43)

KB 12 years ago

hahahhaaa " Overall, the impression i gather as an objective bystander". Please, give us some credit, we are not that dumb here in Ghana. You rather sound very much like a dejected NPP sympathiser who has gotten all his hopes ...
read full comment

hahahhaaa " Overall, the impression i gather as an objective bystander". Please, give us some credit, we are not that dumb here in Ghana. You rather sound very much like a dejected NPP sympathiser who has gotten all his hopes deflated as a result of Afari Gyan mounting the witness box. Please, just shut up and enjoy the further humiliation that your petitioners are going to go through.
Danny Antwi 12 years ago

Sounding like your master Tsikata the violent Counsel, you have to shut the intelligent man up. I give you 28 days, you will be eating your words..

Sounding like your master Tsikata the violent Counsel, you have to shut the intelligent man up. I give you 28 days, you will be eating your words..
NAYNSA NI BA 12 years ago

DANNY, WHERE DOES THE 28 DAYS COME FROM. DO YOU EXPECT THE VERDICT IN 28 DAYS? BY THE WAY I NEVER SAW TSIKATA AS VIOLENT IN THIS CASE. I HAD HEARD ABOUT HIM A LOT AND I SAW HIM PERFORMING AT THE SC. HE WAS CALM. HE EXPRESSED ...
read full comment

DANNY, WHERE DOES THE 28 DAYS COME FROM. DO YOU EXPECT THE VERDICT IN 28 DAYS? BY THE WAY I NEVER SAW TSIKATA AS VIOLENT IN THIS CASE. I HAD HEARD ABOUT HIM A LOT AND I SAW HIM PERFORMING AT THE SC. HE WAS CALM. HE EXPRESSED HIMSELF VERY FIRMLY AND POLITELY. HIS QUESTIONS WERE DEEP AND INSIGHTFUL. ANY QUESTION HE ASKED HAD A PURPOSE BEHIND IT. I SAW ADDISON AT THE OPPOSITE END. HE RAISED,TOO MANY CHILDISH OBJECTIONS WHICH WERE OVERRULED. SOMETIMES HE TRIED TO QUOTE SOME LAW BEHIND HIS OBJECTIONS. I DID NOT SEE THE POINT AND THE JUDGES DID NOT SEE THE POINT EITHER. TSIKATA ASKED ADDISON TO SHUT UP BECAUSE AT THAT POINT THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER WAS BECOMING A NUISANCE. REMEMBER ADDISON HAD BEHAVED MORE IMPOLITELY THAN ANYONE ELSE IN COURT. SOMETIMES HE DISRESPECTED THE JUDGES. SO DANNY IF THE WRITER OFMTHE COMMENT SOUNDS LIKE HIS MASTER, YOU ALSO SOUND LIKE ADDISON WHO IS TOO EMOTIONAL AND HAS BECOME A MASTER OF UNNECESSARY OBJECTIONS.
Tommy 12 years ago

K.B, you have made my day by putting this frustrated NPP sympathiser to where he belongs. Who is he trying to fool? he can fool his guilible illiterate rats with such rubbish, but not Ghanaians. He has put up this bias rubbis ...
read full comment

K.B, you have made my day by putting this frustrated NPP sympathiser to where he belongs. Who is he trying to fool? he can fool his guilible illiterate rats with such rubbish, but not Ghanaians. He has put up this bias rubbish and claimed to be objective. This case might be seen to be a civil case but mind you, the political aspect of it is overwhelming. What made some of them held such false impressions that they are the only people in this diverse country of ours to rule and nobody else? If this is not insanity, what else is it? And he called himself a lawyer. A lawyer my foot! Bullshit and pig sit!
Sankofa 12 years ago

Kwame Ohene Asare, if you have been following events in Ghana since the elections, you will realise that Dr Afari-Gyan is saying nothing new in his evidence.

He is saying exactly what he said at the IPAC post-election wash ...
read full comment

Kwame Ohene Asare, if you have been following events in Ghana since the elections, you will realise that Dr Afari-Gyan is saying nothing new in his evidence.

He is saying exactly what he said at the IPAC post-election wash-up meeting held earlier on in the year.

So your presumption that he has something to hide is mischievous and without foundation to say the least.

Remember that Dr Afari-Gyan has said that he has nothing to hide. In fact, it is quite clear that he is speaking the truth, admitting that there were flaws in the elections and explaining clearly how these arose. He has also said that despite these,the elections and the results were fair.

Just think, why would such an experienced Electoral Commissioner, with extensive local and international experience do anything to tarnish his hard-won reputation?
ayaw 12 years ago

Do you eat shit to talk like that

Do you eat shit to talk like that
ewusi 12 years ago

Oh ! you should knoew by now that Trokosis and not A...s eat shit to talk like that.

Oh ! you should knoew by now that Trokosis and not A...s eat shit to talk like that.
Kwadwo 12 years ago

In most jurisdictions, a witness gives a deposition under oath during discovery before trial. This avoids surprise when the witness testifies at trial. In this case, however, Afari Djan provided no affidavit and his testimony ...
read full comment

In most jurisdictions, a witness gives a deposition under oath during discovery before trial. This avoids surprise when the witness testifies at trial. In this case, however, Afari Djan provided no affidavit and his testimony can spring surprises for the Petitioners. It is also going to be difficult to impeach him as the Ec's affidavits were not provided by him. All the Petioners can hope for is to get as many admissions as they can from him.
THE AUDITOR 12 years ago

Am no lawyer, and given the kind of stuff we the unlearned are made to read from the lawyers these days, not being a lawyer is definitely a plus. Now, suddenly from this world famous OBJECTIVE lawyer, something more serious h ...
read full comment

Am no lawyer, and given the kind of stuff we the unlearned are made to read from the lawyers these days, not being a lawyer is definitely a plus. Now, suddenly from this world famous OBJECTIVE lawyer, something more serious happened during the 2012 Elections than the Petitioners chose to openly rely on in court. Wow! If this is not MISCHIEVOUS, nothing is!!

This man was demonized and bastardized as a fraud and honestly some of us who were genuinely interested in the truth were made to believe that really the election results were indeed falsified and had waited all this while for the evidence. Now,after all the accusations and the guilty verdict in the court of the public opinion, the route the accused person took to appear in court to defend himself and his institution, is now being seriously faulted! Can't believe we can come full 360 degrees so soon. Why choose to leave out relevant evidence when the preponderance of proof is on the Petitioners?

How on earth, has the rock solid incontrovertible evidence melted away and is now being compared to ELECTION NOT BEING COMPETENTLY CONDUCTED, only after the first appearance of the evil Chairman without even waiting for the benefit of a cross-examination?

Could it be that Dr. Aware and his type have known for some time now that there indeed was no smoking gun, but yet had raised expectations such that they just had to turn up in court and use bluster and bravado to win such a huge case, which has the potential to destabilize this country and it's core institutions?

We the true bystanders are still waiting to see or hear or see the bombshell of the evidence and sincerely believe that, even at this late stage, it might emerge from a SPIRITED cross-examination of the Chairman over say two weeks of questioning.

Nothing less will do!!
Kofi Ata, Cambridge, UK 12 years ago

Kwadwo, you and the author of the article are right that it is unfair on the petitioners for Afari-Gyan to spring surprises on them in the witness box. However, I believe this was due to an earlier directives by the Justices. ...
read full comment

Kwadwo, you and the author of the article are right that it is unfair on the petitioners for Afari-Gyan to spring surprises on them in the witness box. However, I believe this was due to an earlier directives by the Justices. That was, all to come by affidavit but only the main parties could give oral evidence. Mr Addison found himself between a rock and hard surface on this matter, though I thought that he should have argued his objection to Afari Gyan coming without affidavit very forcefully. In fact, I suspect because of the risk of being accused of running away from Afari Gyan he did even raise objection but asked for directives from the Justices. It's an unfair advantage.

Danny Antwi 12 years ago

Kofi, that's a very objective comment as usual. Danny

Kofi, that's a very objective comment as usual. Danny
Sankofa 12 years ago

Respondents are not compelled to provide sworn affidavits.

They were asked to provide evidence in the form of sworn affidavits so as to speed up the case, as there were potentially many witnesses. The evidence they were to ...
read full comment

Respondents are not compelled to provide sworn affidavits.

They were asked to provide evidence in the form of sworn affidavits so as to speed up the case, as there were potentially many witnesses. The evidence they were to provide was entirely up to them, not the judges.

By the way, if you are talking about surprises what do you say about Addison playing the tape of Asiedu Nketia's interview. Was that not a surprise for Nketia?
NAYNSA NI BA 12 years ago

EI KWADWO, YOU MUST BE AN INTERNATIONAL LAWYER. WHICH JURISDICTIONS ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT. AT ANY RATE THE JUDICIARY IN GHANA IS INDEPENDENT. IT CAN MAKE AND INTERPRET ITS OWN LAWS. DID YOU HEAR THE REASONS ADDUCED BY THE JUD ...
read full comment

EI KWADWO, YOU MUST BE AN INTERNATIONAL LAWYER. WHICH JURISDICTIONS ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT. AT ANY RATE THE JUDICIARY IN GHANA IS INDEPENDENT. IT CAN MAKE AND INTERPRET ITS OWN LAWS. DID YOU HEAR THE REASONS ADDUCED BY THE JUDGES FOR ALLOWING AFARI GYAN TO TESTIFY? PLEASE DONT BRING YOURSELF.
LILIAN 12 years ago

Stop Masquerading T. S.

Stop Masquerading T. S.
princewilly@ymail.com 12 years ago

There were three daughters and they all wanted to get married but they couldn't afford it and neither could there parents. So the parents said "We will give you all a joint wedding and then you will all be able to get married ...
read full comment

There were three daughters and they all wanted to get married but they couldn't afford it and neither could there parents. So the parents said "We will give you all a joint wedding and then you will all be able to get married".

So they got married and all three daughters then said "I want a honeymoon but we cant afford it". The parents couldn't afford it either so they deiced they would have the honeymoon at their parents house.

So on there honeymoon night their mother woke up and deiced to go downstairs and get a drink. On the way down she heard the first daughter screaming but she juts ignored it. When she reached the second daughters bedroom she could hear laughing and just ignored it. When she reached the third daughters room she could hear nothing and deiced 2 ignore it.

The next morning at the breakfast table she said to the first daughter "Why were you screaming?". And the daughter replied "Well mother you told me 2 scream when something hurt."

Then the mother said to the second daughter "Why were you laughing last night?" and the daughter replied "Mother you told me to laugh when something tickled".

Then the mother said to the last daughter "Why didn't I hear anything coming from your room last night?" and the daughter replied "Well mother you told me never to talk with my mouth full".

DR AFARI DJAN BEHAVES LIKE THE THIRD DAUGHTER ON A HONEYMOON WHO NEVER TALK.
John Hutchful 12 years ago

You are under no obligation to write on Ghanaweb, particularly when you have nothing worth saying.

Solicitor! Really? What does it take to practice as such in UK?

You are under no obligation to write on Ghanaweb, particularly when you have nothing worth saying.

Solicitor! Really? What does it take to practice as such in UK?
DAN 12 years ago

where you have people before that court that are not either witness or defendants. Pacticing law with no degree!

where you have people before that court that are not either witness or defendants. Pacticing law with no degree!
PLUMBER 12 years ago

The SC justices apparently know more than this writer. Afari Gyan is not a chalatan to start talking until he is called. A favour indeed. Sop spinning and brace yourself up for the inevitable.

The SC justices apparently know more than this writer. Afari Gyan is not a chalatan to start talking until he is called. A favour indeed. Sop spinning and brace yourself up for the inevitable.
DAN 12 years ago

Head of FBI just said she'd take 5th over questions about why the gov check very hard into the Tea Party about tax exemption for their election fund raisers last year

Head of FBI just said she'd take 5th over questions about why the gov check very hard into the Tea Party about tax exemption for their election fund raisers last year
Chabba 12 years ago

Certainly Dr. Afari Gyan and the EC have something to hide. Remember they wanted the SC to start proceedings without filing an affidavit? Had it not been the protestation of Mr. Philip Addison, the case would have commenced t ...
read full comment

Certainly Dr. Afari Gyan and the EC have something to hide. Remember they wanted the SC to start proceedings without filing an affidavit? Had it not been the protestation of Mr. Philip Addison, the case would have commenced that day. Curiously, Justice Atugba, the president of the justices did not raise a finger knowing very well that the EC had not complied with the directive of the SC to file their affidavits before the start of the case.

Kokusai 12 years ago

you are an idiot .

you are an idiot .
Ama 12 years ago

Does Afari Gyan looks like a criminal?

Does Afari Gyan looks like a criminal?
NPP My Arse 12 years ago

This guy is not a Lawyer. He is one of the fake NPP imposters on the net.

This guy is not a Lawyer. He is one of the fake NPP imposters on the net.
Danny 12 years ago

Insightful Article. That's all NDC can do. They try to deflate good minds or strong guys with OH he's a fake. The Lawyer is not a lawyer; you even said that the great and mighty Lawyer, Nana is not a Lawyer. We are not

Insightful Article. That's all NDC can do. They try to deflate good minds or strong guys with OH he's a fake. The Lawyer is not a lawyer; you even said that the great and mighty Lawyer, Nana is not a Lawyer. We are not
KWAKU NSIAH 12 years ago

TELL US WHAT YOU KNOW AFARI GYAN DID WRONG IN 2012 ELECTIONS AND STOP BUILDING ABOUT THE BUSH

TELL US WHAT YOU KNOW AFARI GYAN DID WRONG IN 2012 ELECTIONS AND STOP BUILDING ABOUT THE BUSH
NAYNSA NI BA 12 years ago

THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT HAS BEEN OBSERVED BY MANY GHANAIANS. THERE ARE SO MANY BOOK LONG BUT CERTIFICATELESS NPP SYMPATHIZERS ALL OVER. IF THEY KNOW THE LAW AS THEY CLAIM THEY DO THEY MUST GO AND RESCUE ADDISON OR SEND HIM WRI ...
read full comment

THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT HAS BEEN OBSERVED BY MANY GHANAIANS. THERE ARE SO MANY BOOK LONG BUT CERTIFICATELESS NPP SYMPATHIZERS ALL OVER. IF THEY KNOW THE LAW AS THEY CLAIM THEY DO THEY MUST GO AND RESCUE ADDISON OR SEND HIM WRITTEN NOTES BECAUSE HE IS NOT DOING WELL IN COURT. SECONDLY THESE SO CALLED EXPERTS STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT IF THEY DESCRIBE DEGREES THEY HAVE GOT AND WHERE THEY WORK GHANAIANS WILL FEEL DISSY AND READ AND ACCEPT WHATEVER THEY HAVE SAID. NO, THE WORLD HAS CHANGED AND GHANA HAS CHANGED. THIS TIME MANY PEOPLE CAN READ, WRITE AND INTERPRET WHAT THEY SEE AND HEAR. SO THIS WRITER CAN BE A PRINCIPAL SOLICITOR OF SOMETHING IN THE U.K. SO WHAT. WHO KNOWS MAYBE HE ONLY CLEANS FILES THERE. HIS ESSAY IS MEANINGLESS. WE ARE ALL WATCHING THE EVENTS FIILIIFILLII ON OUR SCREENS AND NO ONE CAN COME AND CONFUSE US, JUST BECAUSE HE WORKS IN THE U.K. YOU SEE, THE NPP AND THEIR SYMPATHIZERS ARE LIVING IN ALICE'S WONDERLAND.
Several ways. To kill 12 years ago

Thank God someone has the guts to voice out the views. It might register on the richter of truth measurement. If the s caled judges have the. Guts.

Thank God someone has the guts to voice out the views. It might register on the richter of truth measurement. If the s caled judges have the. Guts.
Ayisha bio 12 years ago

It is obvious that afari gyan has something to hide.... How then do u explain his impromtu appearance in the witness box...furthermore he is now creating a platform where he shifts blame to the temporary staff...he is also tr ...
read full comment

It is obvious that afari gyan has something to hide.... How then do u explain his impromtu appearance in the witness box...furthermore he is now creating a platform where he shifts blame to the temporary staff...he is also trying to gather sympathy by referring to how difficult it is to supervice over 100 000 and over staff....but he seems to be forgetin dat it is the law dat works in the end and not any tall tales
Danny 12 years ago

You make a very good point.In fact he should have had a plan for supervision and monitoring or have a way of satisfying himself that their work we generally satisfactory even if they were more 1 million in number.

You make a very good point.In fact he should have had a plan for supervision and monitoring or have a way of satisfying himself that their work we generally satisfactory even if they were more 1 million in number.
Babs 12 years ago

If this guy is indeed a lawyer as he claims, then God save the law profession! What an obviously political twist couched in a supposedly professional garb! It is shameful that people like think they are being educative. Palpa ...
read full comment

If this guy is indeed a lawyer as he claims, then God save the law profession! What an obviously political twist couched in a supposedly professional garb! It is shameful that people like think they are being educative. Palpably principal NPP die wool!

Okonko Palm 12 years ago

The fact that this writer is trying to transpose criminal formalities in the police training manual in England in comparison to civil pleadings is by itself disingenuous of him.The witness for all the parties except the EC w ...
read full comment

The fact that this writer is trying to transpose criminal formalities in the police training manual in England in comparison to civil pleadings is by itself disingenuous of him.The witness for all the parties except the EC were individuals and therefore are required under the courts direction to come by affidavit only for this purpose.Since in civil pleadings only the affidavit of the plaintiff is required and not witness.The credibility of witness and the determination of their truthfulness is protected by the oath they take before giving evidence.

The EC as a corporate body has a legal personality which is represented by its directors who could represent the interest of the entity.In this wise an affidavit sworn by any of the directors is binding on the rest because of its fiduciary nature.I don't therefore see anything wrong with any of the directors representing the interest of the EC even if that representative is not the depositor of the affidavit.More so the Chairman of the board who has an over all responsibility to the entity.

We should note that the Supreme court is not binded by its directives and can, when it is in the interest of justice and the public to be pragmatic.There is no advantage other than the truth and that is what the public demands and not what is in the police manual of England and wales.
Paul Amuna 12 years ago

We should be careful how we interpret things and people's intentions. since you quote English Law, I am sure you are also aware that unless a person is properly informed and their express permission sought, you cannot record ...
read full comment

We should be careful how we interpret things and people's intentions. since you quote English Law, I am sure you are also aware that unless a person is properly informed and their express permission sought, you cannot record (let alone publish live or otherwise) any conversation of interview you have with them? I am sure you are clearly aware of the data protection act (also revised many times in England)!!!

Your argument about reasons why Dr Afari Gyan did not file an affidavit or why he remained silent are both based on ignorance and bothering on insulting our intelligence and the integrity of the person (who unfortunately cannot answer to your crass statement about him).

You try to give the impression that somehow Dr Afari Gyan either has something to hide or is so arrogant and full of himself that he wants to behave as if he is above the law.

By the way, it is NOT criticism from people like you that made him to appear in court!!! Like the president, he has his team who were in court throughout, and DID NOT NEED to be there (unlike your petitioners who have nothing else doing except to fight for what they believe is rightfully theirs).

Can you tell us, readers where in English Law it is stated that when you are issued with a writ or accused by another person and served with particulars to respond to, you MUST swear an affidavit before you CAN appear in person in court?

I thought that in the Ghana petition case the idea of affidavits was primarily to avoid time wasting and to limit the number of people who would be called in person as witnesses (which could have gone on into 1000s and delayed court proceedings). I thought those you support want a quick resolution of the case so that they can move on just like the rest of us. Why do you pick on Dr Afari Gyan, and why do you hate him so much that you think he is cheap fodder for you to feed your insults on as and when it suits you?

Did you see the futility and stupidity of what counsel for petitioners attempted to do - block the key witness to this whole case from standing in court to state his case? And you say you are democrats? What would it have served any of us if the chief witness in this case was barred from appearing based on your notion of whether he should have filed an affidavit or not?

Was the affidavit the passport to appearing and speaking or mounting the witness box? What is wrong with people like you is that you may claim to have trained in the law but are as ignorant (if not more so) as ordinary people walking about. You also have a selective bias when it comes to the way things (including the law) should operate and thus lack any credibility in providing an objective opinion on matters such as this one.

Your whole article is one which is in poor taste, is written in bad faith,and only because he very person your petitioners did not want to appear in court has done so, and you even want to suggest to us that he "annoyed some of the judges because he refused o appear in court" in the early days. Who are these judges, and how do you know? Are you in any close contact with them and did they tell you so?

I hope readers are seeing you for what you are, a blinded, partisan propagandist who could never in a million years qualify as an "objective bystander". Please remove that tag from your postings.
Wantame 12 years ago

I think you must be living in Mass. Is the E.C a human being? was the affidavit not sworn on behalf of the institution? Remember the petitioners are in court as individuals and not an institution or organization, so they must ...
read full comment

I think you must be living in Mass. Is the E.C a human being? was the affidavit not sworn on behalf of the institution? Remember the petitioners are in court as individuals and not an institution or organization, so they must swear and appear in person. However, any of the seven commissioners of the E.C can represent the institution(E.C). In any case, why are they scared of Dr. Djan being the one to testify? When Addison raised the objection I could see the panic in the faces of the petitioners and their legal team. Those who die in the market place announce their own funeral. The N.P.P has committed political suicide and has already thrown away the 2016 election.The party should have been assessing the cause of their defeat but they are wasting their own time in court? The N.P.P has to remember that the N.D.C has a candidate going into 2016. I feel sorry for the N.P.P, God Bless Ghana.
Danny 12 years ago

I am not sure that even Mahama will be that foolhardy. He will give room for his possible defeat in which case the NDC will not have much of a candidate in him. you can't be that sorry for the NPP. Danny

I am not sure that even Mahama will be that foolhardy. He will give room for his possible defeat in which case the NDC will not have much of a candidate in him. you can't be that sorry for the NPP. Danny
Justman 12 years ago

IF A MAD MAN TAKES YOUR DRESS YOU DON'T CHASE HIM AROUND FOR NOBODY KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE.WITH ALL YOUR LAW CREDENTIALS YOU CANNOT TELL WHAT AFARI-GYAN IS HIDDING.ALL NPPs ARE FULL OF LAWYERS BUT YOUR PREZIDENTIAL CANDIDATE CA ...
read full comment

IF A MAD MAN TAKES YOUR DRESS YOU DON'T CHASE HIM AROUND FOR NOBODY KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE.WITH ALL YOUR LAW CREDENTIALS YOU CANNOT TELL WHAT AFARI-GYAN IS HIDDING.ALL NPPs ARE FULL OF LAWYERS BUT YOUR PREZIDENTIAL CANDIDATE CANNOT SHOW CERTIFICATE.
Ken Ntiamoa 12 years ago

Sir
Akuffo Addo does not have to show his certificate to you or Kpegah or anybody for that matter. Please stick to the issue of an election rigging and let Akuffo Addo have his peace. After all somebody I know ruled Ghana fo ...
read full comment

Sir
Akuffo Addo does not have to show his certificate to you or Kpegah or anybody for that matter. Please stick to the issue of an election rigging and let Akuffo Addo have his peace. After all somebody I know ruled Ghana for almost 20 years after having failed his O Level Exam and some of you think he is the most intelligent human being who ever lived on this planet.

Ken
frank 12 years ago

Thanks lawyer,do not mind those useless critics

Thanks lawyer,do not mind those useless critics
Kwadwo 12 years ago

Paul, I believe you are being unfair to the author of this piece. In civil litigations, witnesses are deposed under oath in advance prior to testifitying at trial. In the US, such out of court depositions are taped and played ...
read full comment

Paul, I believe you are being unfair to the author of this piece. In civil litigations, witnesses are deposed under oath in advance prior to testifitying at trial. In the US, such out of court depositions are taped and played in Court if a party proves that the witness is not available for trial. There is no unfair advantage because both parties usually appear and examine the witness in the deposition.
Although the affidavits provided by the other EC officials are binding on the EC, what the author is suggesting is that Afari Djan's testimony creates an unfair advantage for the EC. One of reason being that it will be difficult to impeach him if he runs away from the affidavits furnished by the other EC officials. Additionally, he can simply ignore the affidavits and give an exposé on elections in Ghana. As you may be aware, the EC provided no pink sheets, and all the Petioners can do is to get admissions through him on the affidavits. He may even give a different spin on the affidavits and not much can be done when that happens.
In any event the Court wants to hear from Afari Djan, and if this gets us to the truth it is all good. However, this does not preclude the author from raising his concerns. Your name calling was therefore uncalled for.
Paul Amuna 12 years ago

I accept your point about the intricate legal issues. However, I am afraid the author's intentions were in my view prejudiced and his opinions were not formed along the same lines as you argue.

I accept your point about the intricate legal issues. However, I am afraid the author's intentions were in my view prejudiced and his opinions were not formed along the same lines as you argue.
ESI 12 years ago

ITS HERE IN AFRICA AND GHANA IN PARTICULAR THAT WE REFUSE TO SEE THE GOOD IN OTHERS WHO WE SUSPECT TO BE EITHER OUR OPPONENTS OR FLIRTING WITH OUR OPPONENTS/ENEMIES.
DR. AFARI DJAN HAS SERVED THIS COUNTRY, SOME AFRICAN NATIO ...
read full comment

ITS HERE IN AFRICA AND GHANA IN PARTICULAR THAT WE REFUSE TO SEE THE GOOD IN OTHERS WHO WE SUSPECT TO BE EITHER OUR OPPONENTS OR FLIRTING WITH OUR OPPONENTS/ENEMIES.
DR. AFARI DJAN HAS SERVED THIS COUNTRY, SOME AFRICAN NATIONS AND THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY AND HAS HELD, STILL HOLDS KEY POSITIONS BOTH LOCALLY AND INTERNATIONALLY.
DR. AFARI GYAN'S ELECTORAL COMMISSION HAS ORGANISED, SUPERVISED AND DECLARED RESULTS OF SIX ELECTIONS FOR US, OUT OF WHICH BOTH NDC AND NPP HAVE BENEFITED.
IS DR. AFARI GYAN REALLY AN ELECTORAL DEMON WHO SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH?
OR IS IT B'COS WE FIND OUR DEFEAT IN THE 2012 ELECTION TOO PAINFUL TO ACCEPT THAT THIS WRITER AND INDEED GHANAIANS COULD NOT EVEN WAIT FOR THE ELECTION PETITION TO BE DECIDED BY THE SUPREME COURT SO THE REAL FACTS WOULD EMERGE FOR ALL TO BEHOLD.
LETS NOT FORGET THAT A NATION THAT DEMONIZES ITS HEROES IS NOT WORTH DYING FOR. GHANA INDEED IS BIGGER THAN ANY INDIVIDUAL, GROUP OF PERSONS OR A POLITICAL PARTY. WE MUST AND SHOULD KEEP IT AS SUCH. IT SHOULD ALWAYS BE GHANA FIRST.
Sankofa 12 years ago

Esi, mmo na kasa!

Let us have more of such sensible contributions to this forum.

Esi, mmo na kasa!

Let us have more of such sensible contributions to this forum.
KT 12 years ago

wow!!!

wow!!!
KOFFI ABBASS 12 years ago

u write like okwampa. the way u displayed ur position "principal solicitor" makes me think u d snr bro of okwampa

u write like okwampa. the way u displayed ur position "principal solicitor" makes me think u d snr bro of okwampa

43 Comments

Welcome,

SIGN IN

Welcome,

RESET PASSWORD

Hello,

Terms and conditions

REGISTER

Did Afari-gyan invoke his right to silence?

Read Comments .st0{display:none;fill:#14BDD3;} .st1{display:none;} .st2{display:inline;fill:#FC0F0F;} .st3{display:inline;fill:#FFFFFF;} .st4{display:inline;fill:none;stroke:#000000;stroke-width:6;stroke-miterlimit:10;} Comments (43)

Read Comments Comments (43)