Posted on: www.dailyguideghana.com
By William Yaw Owusu
Monday, July 29, 2013.
Dr. Kwadwo Afari-Gyan, Chairman of the Electoral
Commission (EC) has emphasized the importance of presiding officer signature on
the pink sheets before the declaration of results at the polling station.
The EC boss admitted that the failure to sign pink
sheets by the Commission’s presiding officers engaged for the December 2012
presidential election “is an irregularity.”
He however, told the Supreme Court hearing the
landmark Presidential Election Petition which is challenging the validity of
the EC’s declaration of John Dramani Mahama as President that, “even though
that failure to sign is an irregularity, it will not affect the validity of the
results.”
He also conceded the importance of the signature
when he said some of the presiding officers who did not sign had to do it at
the collation centre at the prompting of the returning officers contrary to the
law at the time the polling agents had all gone home.
Flashback
In early April, during the
preparatory stages of the proceedings EC’s Director of Finance and
Administration Amadu Sulley had sworn an affidavit to counter the petitioners claim that 2009 pink sheets were not signed
by the presiding officers.
The EC claimed that after being
served with further and better particulars, it conducted an examination and
analysis which showed that out of the 2,009 pink sheets that the petitioners
claimed were unsigned, 1,009 were in fact signed by the Presiding Officer at
the polling station or, at the instance of the Returning Officer, at the
Collation Centre.
It further said 905 were unsigned,
representing 3.5 per cent of the total number of pink sheets nationwide, and
1,989 pink sheets representing 99 per cent of the number claimed to be unsigned,
were signed by the polling or counting agents of the candidates.
“Thus the 2nd respondent maintains
that the request by the petitioners that votes cast at the said polling
stations are invalid and should be deducted is without merit and should be refused,"
the EC said in its amended answer.
“It should be noted that when
several pages of papers impregnated without a carbon are used in order to have
several copies of each page, it could happen that if the person signing or
writing thereon does not press hard enough on the paper, the signature or
writing could appear faint or illegible on some of the pages," it added.
Evidence-in-chief
In his evidence-in-chief on Tuesday, June 4, 2013, led
by James Quashie-Idun the Electoral Commission’s lead counsel, Dr Afari-Gyan
told the court that those presiding officers who could not sign the pink sheets
might be due to the fact that they (presiding officers) had so much to do on Election
Day and could have forgotten to sign.
However, the law says that presiding officer should
authenticate the voting before announcing the results at the polling station.
Mr.
Quashie-Idun: You are aware that the petitioners are
claiming that votes should be annulled on the grounds that the presiding
officers at some polling stations failed to sign the declaration of results
form. Do you have any comment on that?
Dr.
Afari-Gyan: Well, we have examined that claim, if I
remember correctly, originally the number of pink sheets said to be involved
was 2,009. Now I see that the number has been scaled to about 1,800 and
something.
When the number stood at 2,009, our analyses show
that in fact, the ones that were not signed were 905, that when the numbers
stood at 2,009 and this 905 represented 3.5% of the pink sheets and that would
indicate that more than 96% of the presiding officers signed the sheets.
We also noted that about 99% of all agents signed
the pink sheets. Incidentally, my lords, we have no officer called Assistant
Presiding Officer. So when mention is made that it was not signed by the
presiding officer or his assistant, there is no officer called assistant
presiding officer. So it is only the presiding officer who can sign. Apart from
the presiding officer, it is the candidates’ agents who can sign.
These are the only two people who can sign. So
nobody could sign on behalf of the presiding officer. I think we should also
bear in mind that the presiding officer has a lot of work on Election Day.
He performs a lot of duties, signing the pink sheet
is only one, he supervises the election all day, he is the one who makes the
entries on the pink sheet, he is the one that will count the ballots in open
public and he is the one that announces the results.
Mr.
Quashie-Idun: And these results are for?
Dr.
Afari-Gyan: The candidates. He will sort out the
candidates and announce the results as to who has won or not. So the presiding
officer has a lot of duties, signing is only one of them. So we as the
Commission, take a view, we acknowledge the fact that some of the pink sheets
were not signed and have given you an indication of the contents. But we take
the view that when he has performed all these other duties and the form has
been signed by the candidates, even though that failure to sign is an
irregularity, it will not affect the validity of the results and therefore from
the point of view of the commission where the presiding officer has not signed,
but the agent has signed, we accept the results.
Addison
Vrs Afari-Gyan
During cross-examination on Wednesday, July 10, 2013,
when Philip Addison, lead counsel for the petitioners suggested to Dr.
Afari-Gyan that there were more than 905 unsigned pink sheets, the EC boss
insisted it was 905, prompting Justice Vida Akoto-Bamfo, a member of the
nine-member panel to intervene and asked the parties to put it in their address.
Dr.
Afari-Gyan: My lords I have one observation, you may
recall that I did say that some of the pink sheets were signed at the collation
center at the instance of the Returning Officers.
Justice
William Atuguba (presiding): Signed at the
collation center at the instance of whom?
Dr.
Afari-Gyan: The Returning Officer.
Mr.
Addison: My lords, our case is that they have admitted 905
and we say that more than 905 pink sheets are unsigned and this is the evidence
we are providing to the court. Each of these pink sheet are unsigned that is our case and if he disputes it we
will put the pink sheets to him to see that there is no signature.
Justice
Akoto-Bamfo: And Mr. Addison, I think you can
address on this issue, your case is that these pink sheets were never signed,
he is saying well some were signed later so the weight we have to attach
whatever weight.
Afari-Gyan
on Errors
Mr.
Quashie-Idun: You mentioned in your evidence some of
the errors that were committed by presiding officers in completion of the pink
sheets. Do you have a general comment on that?
Dr.
Afari-Gyan: My general comment will be that the
errors must be looked at very closely in order to be able to reveal their true
meaning. I must say that at the end of the day, it is the Electoral Commission
that appointed these people, these officials and we are prepared to take
responsibility for their actions. But errors are to be distinguished from
intentional wrong doing.
A mistake is something that can be detected and
corrected and we all make mistakes. So why we take responsibility for their
actions, so that we will keep in mind, may be all of us make one mistake or the
other in the course of our work, but I will also hope that the candidates will
take responsibility for the agents they appoint.
NDC
Admits Unsigned Pink Sheets
When Johnson Asiedu-Nketiah, NDC general secretary
testified on behalf of President Mahama and his party, he also admitted that
some of the pink sheets were not signed by the presiding officers.
Led in evidence by NDC lead counsel Tsatsu Tsikata
he said even though some of the EC officials did not sign the pink sheets, the
party’s agents all wrote their names and in some cases, they signed the
document.
Mr.
Tsikata: You are also aware that reference has been made to
pink sheets on which there is no signature of the presiding officer at the
polling station?
Mr.
Asiedu-Nketiah: Yes my lord I am aware of that
allegation.
Mr.
Tsikata: What is your response to that?
Mr.
Asiedu-Nketiah: My lord it is true that we are all
trained by the 2nd Respondent that at the close of poll after sorting and
tallying votes to the candidates you have all the party agents including the
presiding officers who must sign then there is a declaration then after the
declaration each party agent is given a copy of the pink sheet and the
presiding officer has a duty of conveying the results at the polling stations
to the collation center. So my lord I am aware that there is a requirement that
the presiding officer must sign.
My lord after we received the petition we studied
the petition but re realized that a lot of polling stations where these lack of
signature was been alleged we found out that the agent actually wrote their
names; in other polling stations they actually signed but yet there were other
polling stations the polling agents did not sign and where the presiding
officers did not sign, but my lord in all these places the polling agents
actually certified that work of the presiding officer and I cannot contemplate
a situation where you are engaged in doing a duty and after that duty you
present it to witnesses who certify that you have done well and then you refuse
to stand by your own words and my lords these signatures must be obtained
before the declaration and in all the polling stations that are in contention
declaration actually took place and the presiding officers also took place with
their duties of transmitting the results so declared to the collation center
and my check has revealed that collation has taken place unchallenged in all these cases so I do not
think that in fact on the form you will also see that whenever an agent is
dissatisfied with any aspect of the work the law allows the agent to protest. I
don’t see any column on the pink sheet where if the presiding officer is
dissatisfy with his own work he has to lodge a complaint again himself and if
our system were to allow the giving or withholding signatures to determine the
validity of votes in particular towns and villages in this country then the
presiding officer will be the person to decide whether all the votes in the
village should count or should not count and I do not think that that is the
intention of our electoral system.
No comments:
Post a Comment