KPMG CROSS EXAMINATION ENDS

Posted on: www.dailyguideghana.com

By William Yaw Owusu

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

KPMG, the accounting firm chosen by all the parties to count the number of Pink Sheets used as exhibits in the Presidential Election Petition yesterday concluded its cross-examination over the report it submitted in the proceedings.

Nii Amanor Dodoo, Head of Audit Practice and a senior partner at the accounting firm told the packed court that as far as the exercise was concerned, they counted pink sheets covering 8,675 single polling stations.

However, the petitioners lead counsel Philip Addison, indicated to the court that per the evidence of Mr. Dodoo, the KPMG report could not be said to be conclusive since there were pink sheets that were not counted in the exercise.

Even though the accounting firm has done its work, the number of pink sheets involved is still going to be ‘explosive’ when the petition is called today as the audience was given a feel of what is likely to happen yesterday.

Mr Addison mentioned to the court that the number of unique pink sheets submitted by the petitioners had still not been resolved since the 8,675 identified by KPMG in their count of the registrar’s set of pink sheets did not include some of the exhibits used by the respondents in the cross examination of 2nd petitioner, Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia  which the petitioners have indicated are as much as 648 as well as some 1,545 exhibits classified by KPMG as illegible due to one or two identifiers which were not clear on the sheets such as exhibit numbers.

The 8,675 unique pink sheets identified by KPMG in their count of the registrar’s set of pink sheets does not also include 2,876 pink sheets found in the set of the president of the panel, Justice William Atuguba which are not in the registrar’s set of pink sheets as confirmed by a partner at KPMG, Nii Amanoo Dodoo.

According to the petitioners all these unique sheets should be included in any count of the unique sheets filed by the petitioners as they are all in evidence and as they have been shown by the KPMG report and also through cross examination, with regard to the exhibits used by the respondents, to have been properly filed by the petitioners.

The petitioners also indicate that an addition of all these exhibits would establish clearly that the petitioners filed well over 11,000 pink sheets.

On raising this point, the court agreed to deal with the matter on Wednesday after which cross examination of EC Chairman Dr. Afari-Gyan by the petitioners would continue.

Dr. Afari-Gyan whose cross-examination was stood down for the KPMG to submit its report, is expected to mount the box but the emerging issue might have to be sorted out for the petition to proceed.

When he mounted the box, the KPMG representative first answered questions from Tony Lithur representing President John Dramani Mahama, then James Quarshie-Idun of the Electoral Commission before Tsatsu Tsikata, lead counsel for the NDC winded up the cross-examination.

President Mahama

Counsel (Tony Lithur): You marched exhibits in the Registrar's copy against those with the controlled copy. You remember saying that?

Dodoo: Yes

Counsel: Were there instances where polling station codes and exhibits numbers did not match?

Dodoo: That was so.

When Justice Rose C. Owusu, a panel member asked Mr. Lithur to clarify his question, counsel said that his cross examination was only to draw the court’s attention to fact that there was confusion in the labeling of exhibits but also said his checks indicated that polling station codes had been labeled differently.

Mr. Dodoo then told the court that he was not  aware about the fact that the petitioners had reduced the number of polling stations they are contesting when suggested to him by Mr. Lithur.

Counsel: You are not aware that the Petitioners furnished this court with further particulars.

Dodoo: I am not aware.

When suggested to the witness that he will not be aware if the Petitioners introduced a different set of pink sheets outside the further and better particulars they presented to the court, Mr. Dodoo said they had to deal with the list of exhibits provided them by the Registrar and that of the controlled exhibits with the president of the panel (Justice Atuguba) and added that KPMG cannot say whether or not other pink sheet exhibits were introduced.

Electoral Commission

Counsel (Mr. Quarshie-Idun): In your cross examination you mentioned the number of exhibits that appeared only and those polling station codes that appeared once. The exhibit numbers that appeared once was 9504 and 5470 are the codes that appeared only once. Is that right?

Dodoo: Yeah that is so.

Counsel: How does that relate to the total number of exhibits counted?

Mr. Dodoo explained that the total population of exhibits counted was 13,842. 1,145 of the exhibits could not be counted because they were not legible. For the exhibit numbers that appeared once from that lot was 9,504 which meant all the other exhibits had been repeated. He said there were unique polling station codes which also appeared once.

Counsel: If you want to know how many single polling stations were filed, what will be the figure?

Dodoo: It will amount to 8675

National Democratic Congress

Tsatsu Tsikata representing the NDC asked the witness if the pink sheets audited were brought in boxes with labels on them but Mr. Dodoo agreed in part and said some of the exhibits came in envelopes but were put in a box.

Counsel: In respect of the 1,545 exhibits which the referee considered as illegible was a decision taken by all the parties at the count right?

Dodoo: That is right,

Counsel: Everyday, as entry is made by the referee, a copy is given to each of the parties and they acknowledge being part of that process, is that right?

Dodoo: That is so

Mr. Tsikata then took witness to a page of the report and said at no point of the process of the count did any of the Petitioner's rep suggest that any entry made was in error.

Dodoo: The Petitioners' reps did not point out any error.

Counsel: At no point did they say the Registrar's set was an incomplete set.

Dodoo: All parties agreed.

Mr. Tsikata then brought the witness to the area of repetitions and duplications and overlaps of some of the pink sheets, the codes and exhibit numbers. To which Mr. Dodoo agreed to some of them.

As Mr. Tsikata continuously asked the same set of questions, Justice Rose C. Owusu, a panel member said if Mr. Tsikata had some challenges with the report he had to make those challenges known to the court in his address rather than asking the witness to confirm the details in his own report.

Mr. Tsikata then suggested to witness that in the report there are same exhibit numbers but different polling station names to which Mr. Dodoo agreed.

Tsikata asks if some of the exhibits were repeated five in some cases six times to which the witness again agreed.

In one case Mr. Tsikata asked the witness to confirm that some polling station code number was repeated 23 times which the witness did.

Counsel: It is clear that it is these repetitions that have accounted for the increase in exhibits from 8,675 to 13,000. Is that right?

Dodoo: That is so

Counsel: Is the accurate figure the court should be dealing with is 8,675?

Dodoo: That is so

The witness was subsequently discharged conditionally by the court but Justice Atuguba made it clear that when the court needed him he would be brought back to explain issues.