">

Your petition is dismissed because it has no merit-SC to Mahama

The seven-member panel hearing the 2020 election petition has dismissed the petition filed by former President John Dramani Mahama.

It was the ruling of the court that the 2nd respondent garnered more than 50% of the valid votes cast as required by the law.

The court also ruled that the error committed by the EC in the declaration was not strong enough to overturn the results announced.

">

Also, the court added that the EC Chairperson had the right to correct the error and was not mandated by law or any statutes to engage the parties before correcting the errors.

It further added the declaration did not violate Article 63(3) of the 1992 Constitution.

It was also ruled that the petitioner John Dramani Mahama failed to provide credible evidence to warrant a second round of the election between himself and President Akufo-Addo.

The court also ruled that the testimonies by Rojo Mettle Nunoo and Kpessa Whye were fanciful.

Whiles reading the verdict of the apex court today, March 4, 2021, Chief Justice Kwasi Anin-Yeboah said the evidence given by the petitioner’s second and third witnesses were of no relevance to the issues under determination.

“As for the other two witnesses, that is Petitioner’s Witness, PW2 and 3; Dr Kpessa-Whyte and Robert Joseph Mettle-Nunoo, the little said, about their testimonies relative to the issues at stake, the better.”

“They recounted the fanciful tale of how the chairperson refused to heed their complaints on some irregularities they noticed on some of the collation forms which came from the regions.

“We describe this evidence as fanciful because, despite this alleged protest, they went ahead to verify and certify 13 of 16 regional collation sheets,” the ruling added.

The court said the petitioner could not prove that the declaration & gazette under article 63(9) made by the 1st Respondent was in violation of Article 63(3), adding, errors with no effect on results cannot void the declaration.

On the issue of the vote padding, the court ruled that it had no effects on the case and could not also be proved because the petitioner failed to provide enough evidence.

It added that even if the vote padding was to be taken by the court on the evidence provided, it would not have had any material effect on the results and the President would have still been declared as the winner because he crosses more than the threshold of more 50% of the total valid votes cast.

The CJ added although the padding was a serious allegation, the petitioner failed to provide credible evidence to support the same.

In conclusion, the court said the petition was dismissed because it had no merit.

The court set our five issues in determining the petition.

The five issues include:

Whether or not the petition discloses any cause of action – that is if there is any legal grounds for the petition,

Whether or not the second respondent [Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo] met the Article 63 (3) threshold of the 1992 Constitution – this constitutional provision states that a presidential candidate must obtain more than 50 per cent of the total valid votes cast to be declared as President-elect,

Whether or not the 2nd respondent [Nana Akufo-Addo] still met Article 63(3) of the 1992 threshold by the exclusion or inclusion of the Techiman South constituency presidential election results.
Other issues are:

Whether or not the declaration by the first respondent (EC) on December 9 of the presidential election conducted on December 7 was in violation of Article 63(3) of the 1992 Constitution,

Whether or not the alleged vote padding and other errors complained of by the petitioner affected the outcome of the presidential election results of 2020.

The seven judges hearing the case were Chief Justice Kwasi Anin Yeboah, Justices Yaw Appau, Marful Sau, Nene Amegatcher, Prof. Kotey, Mariama Owusu, and Gertrude Torkonoo .

With regards to legal representation, Mr Tsatsu Tsikata and Tony Lithur are for the John Mahama (Petitioner).

Justin Amenuvor and Alexander A Somoah Asamoah represent the EC (1st Respondent).

The 2nd Respondent Nana Akufo-Addo has four lawyers and they are Mr Akoto Ampaw, Lead Counsel and had support from Mr Frank Davies, Kweku Asirifi and Yaw Oppong.

By: Rainbowradioonline.com

Exit mobile version