You are here: HomeNews2021 01 28Article 1166350

General News of Thursday, 28 January 2021

Source: www.ghanaweb.com

Tsatsu Tsikata's submission on interrogatory review application an emotional reaction - EC Lawyer

Tsatsu Tsikata, Lead Lawyer for NDC Legal team play videoTsatsu Tsikata, Lead Lawyer for NDC Legal team

Lawyer for the Electoral Commission (EC) in the ongoing election petition hearing at the Supreme Court has described submissions by petitioner John Dramani Mahama's lawyer as an "emotional reaction."

EC lawyer Justin Amenuvor's comments followed a submission by Tsatsu Tsikata during the hearing of the review on the petitioner’s dismissed interrogatories.

Citing some cases relevant to the interrogatories, lawyer Tsikata reiterated the need for the apex court to grant the petitioner's request submitting that it would help the court determine the authenticity of the election result declared by the EC on December 9, 2020.

Mr Tsikata further prayed the judges should not deny his side fair hearing adding that "full opportunities should be given to parties in the interest of fair hearing" explaining that order 22 under CI 47 can still be applied since it will not affect the 42-day timeline the court wants to meet under the CI 99.

When it was his turn to speak, lawyer Amenuvor opposed the application by the petitioner's lawyer arguing that Tsikata's defence statements in court today were nothing new.

"We oppose the application by the petitioner. They have not canvassed any exceptional circumstances. It's only a rehash of what has already been reported."

Lawyer for second respondent Nana Akufo-Addo also opposed the submission praying the court dismiss the review application.

The apex court eventually dismissed it on grounds that the petitioner has not satisfied the court with exceptional circumstances to warrant the grant of the application.

One of the spokespersons of the petitioner, Marrietta Brew Appiah-Oppong said they were unhappy with the ruling as the petitioner has been denied a fair ruling.

“The rulings coming out are short, unlike 2013 when there were detailed rulings…we have to say that the petitioner is not being treated fairly,” Appiah-Oppong said, adding “it is not unfortunate but we have to say it as it is, the petitioner is not being treated fairly…so we disagree with the ruling of the Supreme Court, it's unfortunate but that is their decision so there isn’t much we can do.”

For Frank Davies who is a member of the legal team of Nana Akufo-Addo, John Mahama’s legal team should know better as senior members of the bar.

“You see, when we come to court, we are guided by procedure. It is not what you decide to do in court. It is the procedure of the court which governs proceedings in that court.

“The law is not about what you want it is about what you will get. And this business of they talking about fair hearing… In one of the authorities that their lead counsel, Mr Tsatsu Tsikata, quoted, it was stated quite clearly there that ‘speedy hearing is synonymous to fair hearing. So I don’t (know) what this fetish … it is about expedition, expedition, expedition being sacrificed for justice…And I don’t really get the complaints.”

The case has been adjourned to Friday, January 29, 2021.

Join our Newsletter