<<Print>>

Counsel for the National Democratic Congress (NDC), in the ongoing Presidential Election Petition hearings, Tsatsu Tsikata on Monday, severally disagreed with presiding judge William Atuguba and the nine member bench sitting on the petition on various rulings which for the counsel were not right and limiting. Monday saw Counsel Tsatsu Tsikata continue his cross examination of Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, lead witness for the petitioners and focus his cross examination on the category of duplicate serial numbers as contained in the case of the petitioners. The first banter with Justice Atuguba, which lasted for several minutes, began over the attempt by Tsatsu to cross examine the witness based on the first petition of the plaintiffs dated 28th December which has since been amended. Counsel Tsatsu Tsikata who in the early days of his cross examination was limited in a similar attempt to cross examine on the earlier petition was once again stopped by the Presiding Judge who made it clear that once the petition had been amended, he could not go back to the earlier petition and the amended petition had wholly replaced the earlier one. However, Counsel Tsatsu Tsikata disagreed and suggested that he was seeking to cross examine the witness on the reasons for the changes between the earlier petition and the amended petition. But Justice William Atuguba disallowed the move and directed Counsel Tsikata to move away from that line as the earlier petition was no longer in contention. Still adamant to shift, Counsel Tsatsu Tsikata opined that the earlier petition was still relevant because it was that petition that gave the Court the duty to sit on the case and that he was seeking to establish a trend of changes in numbers in the earlier and amended petition. Justice Atuguba, however, stood his grounds and informed counsel that that could not be done, adding that the amended petition had taken effect from the date of the original petition. �Are you saying that when a pleading is amended, the petitioner can still be questioned on the inconsistency between the first and amended pleadings?� Justice Atuguba quizzed. Another significant point arose when Counsel Tsatsu Tsikata attempted to engage the witness in arguments on the regulations which underlined the elections of December 7th and to suggest that the serial numbers on ballot papers were more important and significant than the serial number on the pink sheets. To make his point, Counsel Tsatsu Tsikata tried using the Electoral Commission�s Guide to Election Officials and Agents, but again Justice Atuguba stopped him and asked him to wait and make those points when it is time for addresses and legal arguments to be made and that they were not issues the witness should be bothered with as he is not the authority to determine such issues. But once again, Counsel Tsatsu Tsikata, as has become the order of his cross examination, disagreed with Justice Atuguba and the bench. He stated that once the document he was seeking to engage the witness on was in evidence, he could cross examine the witness on it. Justice Atuguba emphasized his point by saying �with respect to legal arguments, regulation of legal principle etc. you wait and express it during the addresses and not engage in long battles with the witness� However with Counsel Tsatsu Tsikata was unwilling to change his line of questioning with the excuse that once he had not asked the question, a ruling could not be made on it objecting to the question, Counsel Atuguba obliged the NDC Counsel to ask his question and for a determination to be made after the question was asked. This conditional consent prompted Counsel for the petitioners, Philip Addison to draw the Court�s attention to the constant running battles Tsatsu has been engaging in with the bench anytime a ruling is made against him. �Counsel has developed a reputation for entering into disputes with the bench. Each ruling made by the bench, he disagrees but when the bench rules against me, I accept�, he said. Justice Atuguba finally overruled the question when it was finally asked as it bothered on the same issues he had raised. �We would not record this. These are not matters for cross examination and I really don�t see my way clear to this�, Justice Atuguba ruled. Counsel Tsatsu Tsikata has now spent eight days cross examining the witness with his cross examination becoming famous for repetitions and long drawn battles and arguments with the witness leading the justices to describe his cross examination as being desultory, lacking format and plan.