Akufo-Addo, Addison in fierce exchange

Intelligence gathered by the Daily Post yesterday indicates that there has been a fierce exchange between defeated NPP flag-bearer, Nana Akufo-Addo and his lawyer, Philip Addison, over portions of the content of the address the latter is presenting to the Supreme Court today.

Akufo-Addo, who is the first respondent in a petition he and two others have brought before the Supreme Court, is praying the court to annul millions of votes in the 2012 presidential election, but he is incensed by arguments put up by his lead lawyer which he believes will ultimately go to expose him to national and international ridicule.

Lead counsel of the petitioners, Philip Addison, is arguing that in election matters, “administrative” processes are very vital to ensure the sanctity of the votes. Thus, according to him, once the administrative procedures are flawed, however consequential, whether it is the absence of the presiding officer’s signature, mistake in data entry by the presiding officer or duplication of pink sheets, the results ought to be cancelled at the said polling stations.

However, this claim is contrary to what Akufo-Addo himself said before the Supreme Court started hearing the case. In a speech at a press conference, he stated that “in emphasizing the importance of elections, it must be pointed out that the sanctity of the ballot is and must be supreme. In an election, we cast votes, then the votes are counted, the count is collated, the results are announced and formal declaration of results is made. In the entire process, we must never forget that it is the casting of the ballot that is sacred. The rest of the activities are at best administrative duties. The count, the collation, the declaration of results cannot and should not be more important than the sacred, God-given right of a citizen casting his or her ballot...There is only one principle.”

“Elections are about those who cast the vote, not those who count, not those who supervise, not those who transmit and not those who declare. The heart of the democratic process is about those who cast the vote,” Akufo-Addo said confidently even before the Supreme Court began hearing the case. The dichotomy between Akufo-Addo’s stance on the matter and Addison’s is clear. While the former believes that the heart of elections is not about administration processes but about those who cast their votes, the latter believes administrative processes is the heart of the matter.

Sources say after Akufo-Addo read through the draft shown him by Addison for his input to be made, he vehemently opposed this point and demanded it to be expunged. But a frustrated Addison, who has been made the fall guy for the many faux paus on the part of the petitioners’ counsel during the hearings at the court, believes that Akufo-Addo might as well start singing his swan song if this part is expunged.

“Nana believes that this part of the address will expose him to national and international ridicule and is incensed Addison will not remove it from the address. Addison on the other hand, suspects Nana Akufo-Addo thinks the case is already lost and wants him, Addison, to take the blame for it. It’s a dicey matter. We find ourselves between the devil and the deep blue sea,” a deep throat source within the legal team of the petitioners told this paper.