.JPG)
Dr. Bawumia departs from the court.
Posted on: www.dailyguideghana.com
By William Yaw Owusu
Tuesday, May 21, 2013.
Proceedings at the ongoing landmark Presidential
Election Petition ended abruptly yesterday
at the instance of Tsatsu Tsikata, lead counsel for the ruling National
Democratic Congress (NDC) who are the 3rd respondents.
He requested for an adjournment to enable the
principal witness Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia to go through volumes of pink sheets he (Mr.
Tsikata) had brought in respect of same serial number category which the
respondents claim the petitioners had been duplicated to justify the petition.
The issue of whether the petition is being unduly
delayed has come up strongly since Mr. Tsikata took over the cross-examination
of Dr. Bawumia who is the 2nd petitioner.
Mr. Tsikata, whose client came into the petition by
way of a joinder, is in his 12th day of cross-examination even
though NDC’s co-respondents including President John Dramani Mahama and the
Electoral Commission (EC) used about three days each to conclude a similar
exercise.
There appear to be no indication when Mr. Tsikata
will be concluding as he continues with what many believe is a laborious
cross-examination.
He has always denied criticisms that his style of
cross-examination is designed to delay the process, often accusing the
petitioners of presenting exhibits that forced the respondents to ‘dig deep’ in
order to counter the petitioner’s claims.
Asiedu-Nketiah, BT Damba, Hackmen Owusu-Agyemang, Paapa Owusu Ankomah and Kwabena Agyapong
Objection
Overruled
Before the cross-examination ensued, the court ruled
on last Thursday’s objection raised by Phillip Addison, lead counsel for the
petitioners to the effect that a list Mr. Tsikata sought to be tendered was not
coming from the witness.
Mr. Tsikata had requested the petitioners to prepare
a list of counterpart polling stations that shared same serial numbers during
the election which had become a contentious issue in the case.
Dr. Bawumia agreed to provide the list and when it
was finally brought, Mr Tsikata said he was not going to tender what the petitioners
brought to the court and instead insisted he had his own list to tender.
The court overruled the petitioners objection saying
that if the evidence relating to it was already on record, then this new list
which was merely an index to the pink sheets covered by it is ‘merely
facilitatory’ of tracking the evidence already so covered.
Justice Atuguba said “The list of 32 sought to be
tendered is based on questions and answers emanating from exhibits to which it
relates. That is a process fully gone through. If the evidence relating to it
is already on record, then this [new list] which is merely an index to the pink
sheets covered by it is merely facilitatory of tracking the evidence already so
covered. The objection to its tender is therefore over-ruled.”
Give-and-take
After the ruling, Mr. Tsikata attempted to ask
questions on another document he had prepared but Mr. Addison again objected
before the court again overruled the objection.
Counsel:
You recall that after we showed you that previous list, you went through
another list which also has various exhibits, and I believe your lords went
through the same, but I will just give them back to you ( passes the list
around the bench and to the witness after which he started asking questions
from it. But Counsel for petitioners Philip Addison stood up to object to the
new list)
Mr.
Addison: My lords, we are objecting to the questions, my
lords, the question is based on a list that is not before the court and we
think that if counsel would like to ask questions on that list, then he should
tender the list, otherwise, there is no basis for the question that he is
asking.
Counsel:
My lords I was following the earlier process we’ve gone through, but I’m
willing to tender the list now. I wish to tender the list which I’ve shown to
the witness….
Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey
Mr.
Addison: My lords, there is a difference to the earlier
ruling; in the earlier ruling, questions had been allowed to be answered, now,
we are not allowing those questions to be answered because the primary source
is not before the court. We are taking this objection very early in the day. He
[Tsatsu Tsikata] should answer the objection.
Counsel:
My lords, as I have indicated, we are following the process that was
established by the court for the process of expedition, so that instead of
taking him through individual pink sheets, we would provide a list, and on that
basis, we would have a composite response. The list actually has the
corresponding pink sheets also available to the witness. And my lords, I
believe that this objection is without merit because this is consistent with your
lordships’ directive to provide in composite form, the various pink sheets that
we are going to show to the witness so that we avoid a lengthy process, so my
lords I respectfully submit that it is consistent with your earlier ruling. We
would proceed with the list…The objection was overruled because the questions
had been answered already…I believe that the facilitative nature of the list
that your lordships have directed, still applies to this list and the
subsequent ones that we would seek to tender… (Judges confer. Later, Justice
Atuguba spoke)…
Justice
Atuguba: Could you clarify as to the nature of the list?....
Counsel:
My lords I think, we would go through the process as we did before if that’s
better, because in the past, what I did was…(Interrupted by Justice Atuguba)
Nana Ato Dadzie & Abraham Amaliba
Justice
Atuguba: No, no, no, that’s not what we are asking for; Mr. Addison
is saying that this list you are showing to him is based on the list their
witness prepared and delivered to you, is that the position?
Counsel:
My lords, as I explained the previous occasion in connection with the exhibit
that just went in, this list incorporates information that has been provided by
the witness incorporates the relevant part of those information, and against
that is set the additional information that we are seeking to elicit from the
witness, so the list is not really that information document that they
provided; the list isolates the elements of the information that are relevant
for my questions in cross-examination, and set against that, the duplication
that we are seeking to put to the witness, like we have done in the previous
week. Therefore, it is different; the list is different from the information
that was provided to us....We are tendering what is relevant for our case.
Mr.
Addison: My lords, this list sought to be tendered is said
to be in reference to exhibit NDC 33, My lords, if you take NDC 33 and compare
it to this list, you would see that the information here is not on NDC 33; it
is from the list prepared by the witness, and that is what we are talking
about; that’s the objection we are raising…The list has to be tendered first
before he asks questions with regard to the list…It is distilled from the list
provided by the witness. It can be tendered to make issues clearer for the court…(Justice
Gbadegbe intervenes to seek clarification on the nature of Mr. Addison’s
objection)
NPP gurus
Justice
Dotse: What is the basis of your objection…
Mr.
Addison: The basis of my objection is that a document has
been prepared at the instance of the third respondent, now that document is
available to assist the court, the third respondent has refused to tender that
document, but he’s asking questions on that document. Now if they had regard to
the list that he wants to tender now, the numbers on the list are not on the
NDC 33, it is on the numbers provided by the witness….
Justice
Dotse: I thought we had decided that matter last Thursday
that at this stage, Mr. Tsikata is cross examining the second respondent, if he
does not want to tender the list during cross-examination, the court cannot
force him to do that, even though the decision was somehow divided, I think the
majority view is that it cannot be tendered at this stage. If you wish, you
could do so during your re-examination, so I believe you may not revisit that
matter that is my difficulty….
Mr.
Addison: My lord, we agree with the court that a ruling had
been given that we can tender it if we wish to do so, but that should be the
end of the matter. He cannot be asking questions from a document that has not
in evidence.
Justice
Doste: You see, if you appreciate the directions given by
the court from the time we settled the issues and gave directives to expedite
the hearing, it’s all geared towards ending the matter as early as possible,
that was why I thought we gave some practice direction to enable him do block
cross-examination instead of the single sheets which we all thought it was
time-wasting, therefore, he also agreed and we’ve been going along for now. If
for now, he wants to use your list to help him expedite matters, I don’t think
there’s anything wrong with that…
Mr.
Addison: My lords if it is the wish of this court that
counsel can ask questions on documents that are not before the court, well, we
would go along with it and we hope that when it gets to our turn, the same
courtesy should be extended to us.
Counsel:
My lords, the exhibits that we are talking about are all before the court. I
cannot understand my learned friend’s continued interest in prolonging this
matter…This reference to a future intention of his is completely a distraction.
If he is withdrawing his objection, I think he should do so to enable us to
proceed.
Mr.
Addison: My lords I am not withdrawing the objection, if he
would respond to the objection, I think he should do so, or the court can rule
on that.
Counsel:
My lords I have responded, I have nothing else to add…. (Judges confer again.
Justice Atuguba consequently read the ruling).
ET Mensah
Justice
Atuguba: The objection is overruled.
Tsatsu
calls for adjournment
Counsel:
There is a considerable number in respect of which we a prepared list…My lords,
I don’t know what your pleasure is because whiles he is in the box going
through that, it will not be entirely efficient for your lords to wait. My
lords, one option is that we let them have everything and maybe, if your
lordship were to adjourn for a short period, then we can be sure that he will
have the answers as soon as your lordships come back....
Justice Atuguba: Subject to what the
others will have to say, we are obviously happy to have this interlude to which
we can use as we want…(Seeks the opinion of the counsel for petitioners)
Mr.
Addison: My lords, there is nothing much that we can say,
except that we have been here quite early in the morning and if they’ve given
this list to us, perhaps we would have made some progress. As it is, there is
nothing that we can do.
Counsel:
My lords, I didn’t have option of giving them because we were waiting for your
ruling.
Victor Smith
Mr. Addison then told the court that he hoped Mr.
Tsikata had supplied all the documents that Dr. Bawumia is supposed to go
through to which Mr. Tsikata replied that he had supplied everything.
Sitting continues today at 10 am.
No comments:
Post a Comment