NPP Walewale Election Dispute: Trial set for August 19

Based on the Court’s directive during the hearing on August 14, 2024, regional chairman Fuseini Nurudeen also directed all aggrieved parties in the case, including NPP communicators and regional executives, to cease communications on the case in dispute on TV and radio stations in the Walewale constituency until the case is resolved in court.

He also prohibited interviews, health walks, news conferences, announcements, and public discussions from being broadcast on radio stations in the district.

“My directive is to maintain order within the constituency, unity, and to avoid any potential clashes and conflicts that may arise during the court proceedings if party members discuss the case. We seek peace,” he stated.

“We can’t allow such discussions on our radio station until the court rules on the ongoing case because they could incite residents,” the chairman said in an interview on a radio station monitored by GHOne News, as part of his comments after his press release.

The High Court in Tamale on August 14 granted Dr. Kabiru Tia Mahama (first defendant) in the New Patriotic Party’s (NPP) Walewale Parliamentary primary election dispute the opportunity to file his witness statement by the close of Friday, August 16, 2024.

This was after the Court presided over by Justice Richard Marc Kogyapwah, had accepted his request for leave to enable him to file his processes out of time.

The Plaintiff’s request for an award of costs of GH¢10,000 against the first defendant, Dr. Kabiru Tia Mahama, for deliberately delaying the court proceedings was declined.

Justice Kogyapwah, a Justice of the Court of Appeal who is sitting as an additional High Court Judge, was told that the defendant’s delay tactics were to frustrate the plaintiff’s motion and writ filed.

Samson Lardy Anyenini (ESQ), Counsel for the first defendant, submitted that they were not served with the court hearing notice. He alluded to a motion his client had filed against the plaintiff and the trial judge, but the same has been withdrawn.

It was in the case of Samson Lardy Anyenini (ESQ) that they received the hearing notice, the plaintiff’s witness statement, and evidence of claims only on August 14.

“My Lord, we have never caused any delay in court. Let it be on record for today, 14th August 2024, we have never been served with a notice of hearing. My Lord, the evidence was recently submitted. We feel we have not delayed the court. At the court’s discretion, we desire time to evaluate the claims as well as your permission to file a reply,” Counsel requested.

The Plaintiff’s Counsel, Sylvester Isang (ESQ), claims that the first defendant intentionally tied the court’s hands by filing motions challenging the court’s jurisdiction in order to postpone the proceedings. “The first defendant’s motions delayed the submission of the plaintiff’s witness testimonies, which could only be done if the court had not overruled them. There were deliberate delays,” he said.

On August 14, 2024, the Court, presided over by Justice Richard Kogyapwah, granted first defendant counsel Samson Lardy Anyenini (ESQ) pre-trial leave for two days to allow them to file their rejoinder and witness statement by the end of Friday, August 16, 2024, in order to allow for case management and a daily trial beginning August 19, 2024.

“Due to time limits for filing nominations for parliamentary candidates within the EC schedule, I don’t want to spend too much time analyzing the arguments. Starting Monday, the 19th, we will begin case management with an immediate case hearing. There will be daily hearings until the trial is closed. This will allow both parties to meet the EC’s timeline,” the judge directed.

In an interview with GHOne News in Tamale with Noah Nash following the court proceedings, the plaintiff’s counsel, Sylvester Isang (ESQ), explained his opposition in court against the first defendant’s lawyer’s intention to file further procedure on the register, to which they protested in court.

“After we discussed it, I felt it was necessary to submit additional pleadings on the register. However, the judge believed there was no time and ordered them to file their witness statements for the pre-trial checklist. I prayed for the cost because I wanted to convey a message that you don’t defy court orders. He, the defendant, continued to adjourn the case until it was pleaded in court and the motion was moved. However, the court granted him permission and scheduled a day-to-day trial, and we are confident,” he added.

Counsel for the first defendant, Samson Lardy Anyenini (ESQ), indicated that his client is not the main party in the case because he did not organize the election but rather the NPP, which was supervised by the Electoral Commission (EC), in which he participated.

“My client, like the other contestants, participated in the election. One person will win, and my client did. One party said the procedure was unfair and contained some anomalies. We believe the main parties in this situation are the organizers of the elections. My client, like others, simply participated. He was deemed the winner; therefore, he needs to preserve his interests, which is why we’re here,” the counsel said.

He also stated that they are prepared for the proceeding, “but some procedures were not followed. That is why the court allowed us to have leave so that we could reply correctly. He thanked the court.”

The case was adjourned to August 19, 2024, for case management and immediate trial.