The Supreme Court has described the first petitioner’s witness, Johnson Asiedu Nketia as the star witness of the petitioner, John Dramani Mahama in the dismissed election petition.
According to the panel, Mr. Asiedu Nketia testimony out of the three witnesses of the petitioner in the election petition hearing, was significant to the issues pertinent and raised at in the Court.
“Out of the three witnesses [the petitioner called], the one whose testimony appeared to have relevance to the issue at stake was Mr. Johnson Asiedu Nketia. He was in fact the star witness of the petitioner. His testimony vividly explained the reason the petitioner is in court.
Chief Justice, Kwasi Anin-Yeboah, further disclosed in his ruling that the petitioner should blame themselves for leaving the National Collation Centre, aka ‘Strong room’.
As revealed by the panel, Dr Michael Kpessa Whyte and Robert Joseph Mettle-Nunoo who were stationed at the strong room to observe the collation process on behalf of the 2020 NDC presidential candidate, John Mahama, did not aptly do their job.
As such, they must accept the consequences if they left their post for reasons other than strictly observing the collation process.
“While the testimony of PW1 [Johnson Asiedu Nketia] was emphatic, the testimonies of PW2 [Dr Kpessa Whyte] and 3 [Rojo Nunoo] were in respect of alleged irregularities in the figures or data on some of the collation forms that they sighted in the strong room but after which they ultimately signed or certified”
During proceedings the two witnesses had told the court that they were sent by the Chair of the Electoral Commission (EC) to Mr Mahama at the time of the collation of the final results in the strong room. In their absence the results were then announced.
That notwithstanding, Delivering the judgment on Thursday March 4 the court said “Notwithstanding all these allegations of misunderstandings with staff of the 1st Respondent in the strong room and the fact that they were absent during the declaration they did not give any indication as to how these happenings affected the final results announced by the 1st Respondent”.
Additionally, Chief Justice Kwasi Anin-Yeboah noted that “having signed or certified these forms, the witnesses, particularly, PW3, cannot turn round to talk of irregularities in the said forms. Their testimonies were therefore, of no relevance to the issues set down for determination and we find them unworthy whatsoever in the settlement of the issues.
“In fact, regarding the testimonies of PW2 and 3, if their evidence is to be believed then they have to blame themselves for abandoning their post at the National Collation Centre at a time the verification and certification of the result was ongoing”.
The statement by the Chief Justice preceded the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in dismissing the election petition brought before it by Presidential Candidate of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) in the 2020 elections, John Dramani Mahama.
In lieu of this, the Chief Justice in his judgment statement stated that the petitioner “has not produced any evidence to rebut the presumptions created by the publication of CI 135. We are therefore no reason to order a rerun. We accordingly dismiss the petition”.
