Dennis Dwommoh, a private legal practitioner has called for the creation of a new substantial law purposely for election petition hearing.
Speaking in an interview this morning, he suggested the creation of a separate law for election petition, with reasons being that, it will set specific rules and guidelines.
This he explained that, if new set of laws are created for a petition, the set of rules in it will strictly apply to election petitions and as a result, regular laws will no longer be applied to petition hearings.
Touching on the Former President’s application for stay of proceeding, he disclosed that the petitioner had a right file for such and the decision or outcome of it will depend on the court.
He added that, he doubted the court was going to make room for activities which is going to delay the timelines set for the hearing of the petition.
He clarified the fact that, timelines set are not made by the Supreme court but are timeframes which is already part of the law which the Supreme Court is using adding that, claims being made that the Supreme Court is rushing the election petition process is not as such.
“… the timeline is set by the law and the court is a servant of statue. Lets bare in mind the fact that, sometimes the court will go beyond it and we cannot… but ordinarily, their mandate is to comply with the law in achieving justice.”
Commenting on the orders by the court as to how the trials will proceed without going according to the five days schedules by the law, he explained that, they were on track because in law consequential orders are made.
He further urged the court to ensure that, justice is served fairly and appropriately.
The National Democratic Congress (NDC) flagbearer, John Dramani Mahama, yesterday, filed a stay of proceedings in the ongoing Election 2020 Petition case at the Supreme Court.
Mr Mahama in his application for stay held that “the application for review is based on certain fundamental errors of law that the court made in its ruling, leading to a miscarriage of justice”.
According to Mr Mahama, there were exceptional circumstances of which he is seeking the orders of the court to stay proceedings until the final determination of the application for review.
“Not to stay proceedings would create the unfortunate impression that the review application has been pre-determined. No prejudice will cause the respondents by the grant of such leave.”
He said, for the hearing of the petition to proceed before the review was heard, would cause “irreparable harm” to the conduct of the case since he had been denied the benefit of ‘normal pre-trial processes’.
Mr Mahama said, he had been advised by his lawyer that discovery processes such as interrogatories were normal pre-trial processes and the use of mechanisms of interrogatories would ensure a speedier trial.
