Mr. Nii Amanor Dodoo, a partner at KPMG and the head of the Audit Practice section at the International Accounting & Auditing firm, has confirmed to the Supreme Court sitting on the presidential election petition that the count of the pink sheets in the custody of the registrar of the court and the President of the panel of judges sitting on the petition, Justice William Atuguba, revealed that there were pink sheets in the custody of the president of the panel which were not in the set of the registrar, and also some sheets in the set of the registrar which were not in the set of Justice Atuguba.

Mr. Amanor Dodoo made the revelation when he took the witness stand to defend the final report on the count produced by KPMG who were appointed as referee to do a true and faithful count of the pink sheets in the custody of the registry and the president of the panel.

While being cross-examined by lead Counsel for the petitioners, Philip Addison, Mr. Amanor Dodoo stated that the count revealed that 2,876 pink sheets in Justice Atuguba’s set were not in the set of the registrar while similarly, 6,629 pink sheets in the set of the registrar is not in the set of the president of the panel.

The petitioners’ lead counsel also stated that 1,097 pink sheets out of the 4,089 pink sheets used by the respondents in their cross-examination of Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia were not in the set of the registrar while 2,230 pink sheets out of the 4,089 used by the respondents in their cross-examination are not in the set of the president of the panel.

In all, Philip Addison stated that 648 pink sheets used by the respondents in their cross-examination, were neither in the set of the registrar nor that of the president of the panel.

While following up on questions on the pink sheets used by the respondents in their cross-examination of Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, which were duly filed by the petitioners but are not in the sets of the president of the panel or that of the registrar, Counsel for John Mahama and the NDC objected to the particular line of questioning indicating that the referee was not competent enough to answer those questions and that the questions were not relevant to the work of the referee.

However, Counsel Addison countered their argument by saying that pink sheets which had been duly filed by the petitioners and which had been presented in open court in cross-examination and which were in the records of the court, could not be described as irrelevant to the matter on board, especially because what precipitated the whole count of the pink sheets was the need to determine the specific number of pink sheets, which had been filed by the petitioners, and since those presented during the cross-examination of Dr. Bawumia were also in evidence as having been filed, then it could not be irrelevant.

In a majority ruling of eight (8) to one (1), the Court overruled the objection and allowed Counsel for the petitioners to continue with his questions.

The revelations on the KPMG audit supports the petitioners’ long stated argument that there was a mix up in the service of the pink sheets by the registry and that the petitioners could not be blamed for any shortages on any of the parties as they were not the ones who served the various parties.

Mr. Amanoo Dodoo also stated that, in all, 13,926 pink sheets were counted in the registrar’s set, and that 9,860 pink sheets were also counted in the set of the president of the panel though he also indicated that the set of the president of the panel was short by one box, which had been stated in the final report.