The Supreme Court has ordered once again the legal team for the Petitioner, John Dramani Mahama, to file their witness statement to aid the continuation of the process as initially ordered by the court or have their case dismissed from court.
In the fourth sitting which took place today, 26th January, 2021, the panel of judges, headed by Justice Anin Yeboah, cautioned the legal team of the petitioner that, failure to adhere to the orders of the court and the disrespect to instructions will leave the court with no choice than to have the petition dismissed.
This order comes as a result of the petitioner’s failure to adhere to the court’s order to file their witness statement by January 21 as instructed in the last sitting.
The team filed a stay of proceedings instead which was seeking to put the process on hold until the court deals with its review application on its ruling on the interrogatories.
A lawyer for Mr. Mahama, Tony Lithur in defence, explained to the Supreme Court that, it was their understanding that per their application for stay of proceedings, they were not to file the processes expected.
The Court in this regard however took serious exception to the position, where Chief Justice Kwasi Anin-Yeboah in reading the decision of the Court said Mr. Mahama must comply with the orders of the Court or risk having his case dismissed.
The legal team of the petitioner, was then referred to the rules of court which supports the case dismissal.
“The petitioner is referred to the following rules of court. Rule 69 (C4B) of the Supreme Court of rule C.I.16 as amended by C.I. 99 which reads the court may dismiss the petition where the petitioner fails to file the processes regarding the petition within the specified time or hear and determine the petition when the respondents fail to file their answers or the processes regarding their answer within the specified time.
“Indeed, this position in the procedural rules of the Supreme Court relating to the presidential election petition is echoed through the different hierarchy of court in the current case management structure and will not be compromised.”
The court then stated that, another sub-rule of the High Court civil procedure amendment which is order 32 rule 7 of A sub-rule 3 which governs trials in the High Court, has a similar provision.
The court also said, the business of conducting the petition will be done in an orderly and expeditious manner and as procedurally directed by C.I. 99.
It further noted that, it is clear that whatever issue that may arise from the interrogatories filed by the petitioner can be incorporated in the due conduct of the trial.
“We do not appreciate the fact that the current processes filed should make room for the petitioners to ignoring the prior orders of the court. To the extent that the earlier order has not been complied with.”
The case has been adjourned to the 28th of January, 2021.
