<<Print>>

Ghanaians will witness another spectacle this morning when the four lead counsels in the ongoing presidential election petition will lock horns to deliver their address and justify their stand at the Supreme Court. The four have been allotted 30 minutes by the court to make verbal addresses after presenting a written address. The petitioners filed a 176-page address to justify the annulment of votes at the 10,119 polling stations, while the President, the EC and the NDC filed 84, 15 and 69-page addresses respectively to dismiss the petitioner�s case on the basis that they (petitioners) failed to prove their claim. The oral addresses will focus on why votes should or should not be annulled due to over-voting, voting without biometric verification, some presiding officers not signing pink sheets (statement of poll and declaration of results form for the office of president) and some pink sheets having duplicate serial numbers. Petitioners Lawyer Philip Addison, lead counsel for the petitioners will be protecting the interests of Nana Addo Dankwa Akfuo Addo, Presidential candidate; Dr Mahamudu Bawumia, running mate to the NPP presidential candidate and Jake Otanka Obetsebi-Lamptey, NPP National Chairman who want President Mahama deposed on the strength of the 1992 Constitution. According to them, the declaration of John Mahama as President in the December 7 and 8 elections by the Electoral Commission were flawed. They are therefore praying the court to nullify some 4 million votes declared by the EC. Lawyers, Tony lithur, counsel for President John Mahama, James Quarshie-Idun for the Electoral Commission (EC) and Tsatsu Tsikata for the National Democratic Congress (NDC) on the other hand, will pray the court to dismiss the petitioner�s argument and sustain the declaration made by the EC. First respondent Tony Lithur will argue that �no election is to be declared invalid by reason of any act or omission. The returning officer, or any other person in breach of his official duty, in connection with the election or otherwise of the appropriate elections rules; if it appears to the tribunal having cognizance of the question that the election was conducted in accordance with the law as to the elections, the act or omission did not affect the results� hence there is no substance in the case of the petitioners. Second respondent Quarshie-Idun is also expected to challenge the position of the petitioners by indicating that the petitioners have not established and proved their over-voting claim: �they were not able to cite a single example among the 26,002 polling stations in which votes in the ballot box exceeded the number of persons entitled to vote�. Third respondent Tsatsu Tsikata on the other hand, is expected to cling to the KPMG report by praying the court to dismiss the case of the petitioners, claiming it has no merit. After the presentation of the oral address, President of the nine judges will give a date for the final ruling which will bring the long journey and a fierce battle of legal wits to an end.