TSATSU FINALLY LANDS

Nana Akufo-Addo & Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia

Posted on: www.dailyguideghana.com

By William Yaw Owusu

Wednesday, May 22, 2013.

After 13 days of laborious cross-examination, Tsatsu Tsikata, lead counsel for the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC) finally brought his grilling of principal witness Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia to an end.

However, the NDC counsel indicated that he would conclude finally subject to the report to be submitted by KPMG, a reputable international accounting firm that has been chosen to count the number of pink sheets attached as exhibits by the petitioners.

Finished or Not Finished

There were murmurings in the courtroom when Mr. Tsikata said “subject to the report of the referee, that will be all for the witness,” triggering another heated debate that needed the court’s ruling to settle matters.

Mr Tsikata tendered in evidence, the exhibits that led to the adjournment on Monday which was to enable Dr. Bawumia, to match the polling stations with same serial numbers on the request of Mr. Tsikata.

When asked by Mr. Tsikata whether the pink sheets with same serial numbers had been duplicated, Dr. Bawumia replied that none of the pink sheets was ever used twice in the analysis.

Counsel then brought Dr. Bawumia to the affidavits he swore and tried to test him in the averments he made, taking the witness to a number of polling stations where over-voting occurred and where there were no signatures of election officials on the pink sheets.

In terms of the number of polling stations, Dr. Bawumia replied that as at the time of deposing to the affidavits those were the information available to him but after an update of the analysis, some of the figures changed.

Gloria Akufo

Counsel came back to the number of pink sheets involved once again and suggested to Dr. Bawumia that they were not up to 11,842 as claimed by the petitioner but the witness insisted that they submitted the right number.

Counsel: I further suggest to you that you have deliberately padded up the numbers by repeating them over and over again, sometimes in the same category, sometimes in different category.

Witness: You are wrong! There is no gain to deliberately pad exhibits. What is the purpose? All these have to be audited by the court so I don’t really understand this argument of padding of exhibits

Counsel: I am putting it to you finally that you and your co-petitioner have engaged in a massive deception

Witness: I reject this suggestion. There has been massive violations irregularities and malpractices in this election and the 1^st respondent has been the beneficiary of such massive violations of the law and this is why we have brought this evidence to court.

Chris Ackumey & Tsatsu Tsikata

Addison’s Insistence

With Mr. Tsikata’s caveat that completing his cross-examination would be subject to the report from KPMG, Mr. Addison rose to seek clarification for the NDC counsel’s statement.

Mr. Addison: My lords, I seek clarification on the statement: “Subject to the work being done by KPMG”. Does he mean that he is going to cross examine the witness again as a right?

Justice Dotse: All of you would have a bite when the report is out, not only the counsel for the third respondent; that would apply to all of you…but then the position is that if you look at the evidence, I think the respondents are disputing your figure of 11, 842 which has been reduced to 11, 138. If the report of the referee shows otherwise, then he would have to come back.

Mr. Addison: They come back as of right or they would come for leave?

Justice Dotse: Well, that one, the court would have to decide.

Nana Ato Dadzie

Mr.  Lithur: My lord, in fact, it is not only him, we would have to also cross-examine … (court burst into laughter). No realistically, I may not have to; one of us may do it. But like we said, if some documents are freshly being introduced to us to the extent that they differ substantially from what the trend has been…..I think we reserve the right to come back.

Mr. Addison: My lords, all we seek to find out is that, is that the end of his cross-examination?

Justice Atuguba: Well, I think that the statement doesn’t need interpretation; it is clear and unambiguous (Citing Mr. Tsikata’s condition that his cross examination is subject to the report of KPMG)

Johnson Asiedu-Nketiah

Mr. Addison: My lords, in other words, after the count, if there are new matters that they have not taken into consideration, they would come and cross examine on that? This calls into question the whole exercise as I have said since day one. Why don’t they tell us those pink sheets they are missing so we supply them so they can go on with the cross-examination, instead of waiting one week for them to come back to cross-examine after they have been told by somebody else that these documents are in the registry.… (The judges took turns to explain the need to wait for the KPMG report). My lord if that is the case, and then they should end their cross-examination now.

The Ruling

After conferring with one another, Justice Atuguba eventually spoke on behalf of the nine judges saying that subject to the outcome of the KPMG report, Mr. Tsikata should officially end his cross-examination and give way for the witness to be re-examined by his counsel.  Mr. Tsikata stood up to indicate that his cross-examination has indeed has come to a close subject to the report. He noted that the recount relates to a “very limited area”.

Mr. Addison is expected to re-examine Dr. Bawumia today.